


39RH0 





A 



>&S^ 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS. 

Chap, Copyright No. 



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. 










yy<^ 







^c 






3^k 



1 



AUG 



22 



I 



UVERl 

AUG29 

of Con 



1898 



Thirteen Chapters 

On 

First Day Observance 



BY 



JOHN M, VANKIRK, L L. B, 



DES MOINES, IOWA, 

CHRISTIAN INDEX, 

PUBLISHING COMPANY. 

1898. 



| v \0 

n|3 



'28 



Entered according to act of Congress, in the year 1898, by 

JOHN M. VANKIRK, 

In the Office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington, D. C. 



»e 8f 




COPIES RECEIVED. 



Preface- 
No man is to-day justified in inflicting a 
new book upon the world without good reason 
therefor. The author's excuse for this vol- 
ume is, that it seeks to fill a place in an im- 
portant field heretofore not wholly occupied. 
It is true there are many books upon the sub- 
ject here treated. Most of them are, how- 
ever, impotent so far as being any adequate 
defense of first-day observance is concerned. 
It has been our object to discuss somewhat 
thoroughly the grounds, and in the author's 
opinion, the only grounds, upon which first- 
day observance can be properly and success- 
fully predicated. 



4 PREFACE. 

This volume does not undertake a discus- 
sion of all the issues presented by Seventh- 
day Adventism. The "Sabbath" question we 
do not discuss at all, except so far as it was 
incidentally necessary in defending the claims 
of the first-day of the week. When the Sab- 
bath was given, to whom it was given, the 
time of its abolition, and the proof s upon these 
points are not the subjects herein claimed to 
be covered. This volume is devoted solely to 
the proof of the proposition that the first-day 
of the week is the Lord's day of this Christian 
Dispensation — and if this be proven it follows 
as a matter of course that it should be ob- 
served as such by all Christians. If the first- 
day of the week is the Lord's day, then it fol- 
lows that the Sabbath is not that day, and 
therefore in proving our proposition we dis- 
prove Sabbatarianism as completely as though 
we had examined and refuted each Sabbatar- 
ian argument in detail. This book is written 
from the standpoint of a debater. We have 
met in public debate some of the ablest debat- 
ers in the Sabbatarian ranks and are there- 
fore very familiar with their modes of attack- 
ing first-day observance. We have aimed to 
meet all their quibbles that seem to require 
any refutation. While it has been our aim to 
provide a sort of a handbook for debaters and 



PREFACE. 5 

busy pastors, we have at the same time sought 
to present the material gathered in popular 
style, in readable shape for all classes. 

We do not claim that we have said all 
that can be said on the subject. It has been 
our endeavor however to present a sufficient 
amount of pertinent matter to abundantly 
sustain the proposition proposed. "Sabbath 
or Lord's Day," by Prof. D. R. Dungan, was 
the first book upon this subject ever read by 
the author. To this little book and the in- 
structions received from Prof. Dungan in the 
class room many years ago the author confes- 
ses himself largely indebted. It was from 
Prof. Dungan that we first received our bear- 
ings upon this subject. "Seventh-day Adven- 
tism Renounced," by Canright, is also a most 
excellent book of our acquaintance. The 
Waggoner and Vogel Debate is another book 
over which every would-be disputant should 
burn mid-night oil. Hessey's "Sunday" is a 
scholarly production of value. "The Evolu- 
tion of a Shadow," -by Weston, presents a pe- 
culiarly able discussion of this subject also. 
On the Sabbatarian side we have read about 
all the tracts and pamphlets published by 
Seventh-day Adventists and in our study 
we have made constant use of their great 
book, "The History of the Sabbath," by J. N. 



6 PREFACE. 

Andrews. No attempt has been made to con- 
form the sentiments of this book to those of 
any creed or church. We have written in a 
wholly independent spirit. The views ex- 
pressed are those of the author. We do not 
pretend to represent anyone else. Neither 
the church with which we affiliate nor any 
member thereof is bound or concluded by our 
conclusions. By our own election we have 
written, and upon our shoulders alone rests 
the responsibility of the views presented. It 
is usual for the author of a book to gravely 
inform his readers that the book was written 
under great difficulties. And upon this point 
we can "toe the mark" with ease. During 
the time of the writing of the major part of 
this book, the author was preaching regularly 
every Sunday besides attending to his law 
business during the week. We have given a 
large number of quotations. It is no doubt 
true that the substance of these might have 
been stated more briefly in our own language. 
But this would not have answered so well for 
the use of debaters and pastors. This book 
is necessarily controversial in its nature and 
the mere statement of a fact by the author 
can be expected to receive but little respect at 
the hands of Sabbatarians. But where each 
point is fortified by numerous extracts from 



PREEACE. 7 

recognized authorities, that presents a case 
not so easily disposed of. It is our hope that 
this presentation of this much discussed sub- 
ject may prove useful to those upon whom it 
rests to defend "the faith" and to preserve 
the faithful pure in the midst of diverting 
heresies. The Author. 



Introduction, 

A WORD CONCERNING THE AUTHOR. 

I desire to say a word of approval of the 
author of this book. He has made a thorough 
study of the different teachings of Adventists 
from his boyhood. I know him well and know 
that whatever he does he does well, A son 
of one of our ministers, born in Linn County, 
Iowa, German by descent, he is of the right 
stock for thorough and patient investigation. 

He was first a student of Drake Universi- 
ty in the Bible department, and after several 
years in successful pastorates at Spencer, 



INTRODUCTION. 9 

Kuthven, Red Oak, Oakland, add other Iowa 
points, he gave a year to news paper work, af- 
ter which he -returned to Drake University 
and took the law course and has been admitted 
to the bar ; but with not the least thought of 
ever leaving the ministry of the word. But 
like Paul that he may boldly speak the word 
without feeling his dependence upon his hear- 
ers for his daily bread. 

During Bro. Vankirk's years of labor, 
both as a minister and an editor, he held 
many successful discussions with different 
representatives of Adventism, and whether it 
was the Sabbath, soul- sleeping, or destiny of 
the wicked, he never failed to sustain his 
position. 

Three of his public debates I had the 
privilege of attending. These were at Spen- 
cer, Red Oak, and Stennett — Iowa points. 

Within a short time after the Stennett de- 
bate, Bro. H. U. Dale organized an excellent 
Church there and the only Adventist family 
I now recall united with the Christian church. 
I can not personally speak of the debates at 
Ames, Kalona, and Old Avon, Iowa, nor the 
one at Worthington, Minn; but from testimon- 
ies received from those who have had the op- 
portunity for personal investigation, each of 



10 INTRODUCTION. 

these has proved helpful to the cause of our 
Master in the communities in which they were 
held. This will certainly prove a useful work 
for our ministers who have not the time for 
extended research into these questions, as 
well as a very helpful book of reference for 
elders and others of the laity who are often 
annoyed by these representatives of legalism 
and traditionalism. It is to be hoped that in 
the near future the author of this book may 
turn his attention to preparing a handy book 
of reference on modern prophets in the church, 
and soul sleeping. I trust that this effort 
may prove another step toward a higher ap- 
preciation of the ministry of our Lord as well 
as a more practical and ethical use of His holy 
day. Granville Snell. 

Trenton, Mo. 



V 



Table of Contents, 

Preface 3-7 

INTRODUCTION. 
PRELIMINARY OBSERVATIONS. 

Sunday not prcperly called the "Sabbath," Never 
was any "change of the Sabbath. " The ground of 
first-day observance. The time when Sunday ob- 
servance began 17-21 

THE SEVENTH- D AY ADVENTIST FALSE PROPH- 
ETESS, MRS. ELLEN G. WHITE 22-34 

CHAPTER I.— Sect. 1-9. 

THE LORD'S DAY. 

He kuriake hemera — Rev. 1:10. The Lexicographers 
on Kuriakos. Sabbath not the kuriake hemera. Laws 
of Interpretation. Smith's Diet, on kuriake hemera. 
Kuriakos occurs but twice in the New Testament. 
The Apostles formed the word kuriakos. John uses 
"Sabbath" for seventh-day of the week. Objec- 
tions Answered.— Isa. 58:18— Mark 2:28 35-51 



12 CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER II Sect. lO 28 (a). 

THE LORD'S DAY FROM A. D. 440 TO A, D. 63. 

Sozomen. Augustine. Eusebius. Peter of Alexan- 
dria. Anatolius. Apostolical Constitutions. Cy- 
prian. Origen. Tertullian. Clement of Alexan- 
dria. Bardesanes. Gnosticism. Dionysius. Jus- 
tin Martyr. Epistle of Barnabas. Pliny. Teach- 
ing of the Twelve Apostles, John. Luke. ''Fath- 
ers of the Catholic church" 52-92 

CHAPTER III Sect. 29-35. (c) 

THE VOICE OF HISTORY. 

Schaff. Fisher. Lamson. Gregory. Ruter. James. 
Mosheim. Neander. Our authors all first-day 
men 93-107 

CHAPTER IV.— Sect-36-44 (b) 

WHAT THE ENCYCLOPEDIAS SAY. 

Britannica. Johnson's Universal. Schaff-Herzog 
Ency. of Religious Knowledge. Penny. Ree's. 
New American M'Clintock & Strong. Kitto. 
International. The Sabbath and other Mosaic rites 
among the Jewish Christians 108-115 

CHAPTER V Sect. 45-47. 

TESTIMONY FROM THE DICTIONARIES. 

A Catholic Dictionary by Addis & Arnold. Diet, 
of Christian Antiquities. Smith's Bible Dic- 
tionary 116-118 

CHAPTER VI— Sect. 48-53. 

THE COMMENTATORS ON REV. 1:10. 

Barnes. Lange. Bible Commentary. Meyer. Hen- 
ry. Jamieson. Fausset & Brown. Clark. Scott. 
Eclectic Commentary 119-121 



CONTENTS. 13 

CHAPTER VII,— Sect. 54-59 (a). 

THE FIRST DAY OF THE WEEK AT CORINTH AND 
AMONG THE CHURCHES OF GALATIA. 

1 Cor. 16:1-2 — kata — Every first-day of the week. 
The Translations. American Bible Union. Liv- 
ing Oracles. Interlinear New Testament. Em- 
phatic Diaglott. Syriac N. T., Murdock. Young's 
Bible Translation. Noyes' N. T. Translation, 
The Commentators. Meyer. Macknight. ? His- 
torian Andrews. A public meeting at Corinth a 
necessary inference. Galatians also met on first 
day— par heauto. Emphatic Diaglott. Living Ora- 
cles. Rotherham. Westcott & Hort. Liddell & 
Scott. Strong. The Commentators on 1 Cor. 16: 
1-2. Macknight. Jamieson, Fausset & Brown. 
Doddridge. Clark. Syriac of 1 Cor. 11:20. Date 
of Peshito Syriac. Schaff-Herzog. Kitto . 122-134 

CHAPTER VIII.— Sect. 60-71. 

THE MEETING AT TROAS. 

Acts 20:7. An actual instance of a congregation of 
Christians meeting oa the first-day of the week. 
No Sabbath meeting at Troas. Not a special called 
meeting. Paul walks nineteen miles. Methods 
of reckoning the day. Time of observing the sup- 
per. Traveling on Sunday. John uses Roman 
time. Liddell & Scott. Westcott & Hort. Barnes. 
Dr. Thompson. Emmaus. Schaff-Herzog Eucy. 
Probabilities as to how Luke reckons the day in 
Acts 20:7. Rauschenbauch, Hackett. Barnes. 
Ramsay, The Commentaries on Acts 20:7. Ol- 
shausen. Pulpit Commentary. Matthew Henry. 
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown. Conybeare & How- 
son. Barnes. Alford. Weekly communion the 
rule in the primitive cnurch. Barnes. Scott. 
Mason. Clarke. Matthew Henry. Kitto. Schaff- 
Herzog Ency. Watson. Cramp. Syriac of Acts 
20:7. One name or designation of a day at a fme 
is sufficient 135-166 



14 CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER IX— Sect. 72-76. 

TWO FIRST-DAY MEETINGS. 

Jno. 20:19-26. Jesus met with the disciples on tne 
day of his resurrection and also one week later — 
"After eight days." Biblical scholars on the time 
of the Jno. 20:26 meeting. Barnes. Matthew 
Henry. Jamieson, Fausset & Brown. Hanna. 
Whedon. "Eight day" in the early church. Ob- 
jection answered. 1 Chron. 9:25. Andrews 167-182 

CHAPTER X— Sect. 77-78. 

SUNDAY AND THE ROMAN CATHOLICS. 

Did the Catholics change the Sabbath? When and 
where did Rome make the change? Sunday-keep- 
ing the Mark of the Beast. Uriah Smith. An- 
drews. Mrs. White. The real teaching of the 
Catholics. Douay Bible. Catholic Dictionary. 
Dullard. Hummert. Tract, Who Changed the 
Sabbath. The date of the establishment of the Pa- 
pacy. Uriah Smith 183 190 

CHAPTER XI— Sect. 79. 

CONSTANT1NE AND SUNDAY. 

The edict of Constantine the result of a previousgen- 
eral observance of the day by Christians . . .191-194 

CHAPTER XII— Sect. 80. 

AN OBJECTION CONSIDERED. 

Could Sunday observance properly have arisen after 
the death of Christ 195-199 

CHAPTER XIII— Sect. 81-87. 

SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST HISTORIANS. 

Andrews. Morer. Domville. Cox. Diet, of Na- 
tional Biographv. The Book .of Sports. King 
James I. King Charles I. Ency. Brit. Interna- 



CONTENTS. 15 

tional. Laud. Ency. Brit, New American Cy. 
Peter Heylin. New American Cy. M'Clintock 
& Strong. International. S chaff -Herzog Eacy. 
Diet, of National Biography. Jeremy Taylor. 
Johnson's Universal Cy. White. Andrews. 
Ency. Brit. These alledged friends of Sunday 
trom whom Sabbatarians quote, were in fact bitter 
enemies of Sunday sacredness 200- 214 

INDEX TO AUTHORS 215-220 

ERRATA — Page 23 eleventh line from bottom of the 
page ''ultimately" should read "intimately." P. 46 
seventh line from bottom, also p. 130 seventh line 
from top spell "Liddell." P, 47 ninth line "consid- 
erate" should read "considerable." P. 50 seventh 
line "kuriakos" should read "kuriake" P. 53 ninth 
line change '"Justice" to "Justine." P. 64 second 
line from bottom should read ''accustomed to observe 
certain days." P 65 tenth line from bottom "repre- 
sent" change to "misrepresent." P. 71 nineteenth 
line change "strengthened" to"sfcrengthener," and in 
next line ' 'observed " to ' 'observer. " P. 76 seventeenth 
line "Antonius" change to "Antoninus." P. 84 sev- 
enteenth line change "writers" to "critics." P. 89 
fourth line "could have" should read "could or would 
have." P. 96 eighth line change "Aloan" to"Alvan." 
P. 124 eighth line "Noye's" change to "Noyes'. " P. 
130 seventh line change "Hart" to "Hort." P. 133 
eighth line and p. 134 third line from bottom omit "r" 
in "Peshito." P. 136 sixth line "Antycbus" should 
be "Entychus." P. 146 eighth line change "popular" 
to "particular." P. 158 first line change "east" to 
"west." 



Explanations. 



1. All scripture quotations, unless otherwise 
stated, are from the Revised Version . 

2. A. V. — The Authorized Version of 1611, popu- 
larly known as the King James translation. 

3 R. V.— The Revised Version 

4. Unless otherwise indicated ail quotations from 
Lexicons, Histories, Encyclopedias, etc., are to be un- 
derstood to have been copied directly from the books' 
quoted. 

5. Quotations from the "Fathers" are from recog- 
nized and standard translations. 

6. Quotations from Andrew's History of the Sab- 
bath are from the third edition, revised, Battle Creek, 
Mich., 1887. 

7. The term " Sabbath " when used by the author 
always refers to the seventh-day of the week, and never 
to the first-day. Someof the authors herein quoted use 
the term Sabbath to indicate the first-day of the week. 
Such cases will be readily apparent to the discerning 
reader. 

8. N. T.— New Testament. 

9. O. T.— Old Testament. 

10. By the term "Sabbatarian" is meant observers 
of the seventh-day of the week. 

11. Owing to a habit acquired while occupying the 
ecitorial tripod the author finds himself using "we" 
and "our" by which to designate himself. 



Preliminary Observations* 



The first day of the week is commonly 
called the "Sabbath." This is a mistake. 
The Sabbath of the Bible was the day just 
preceeding the first day of the week. Matt. 
28:1. says:- -"Now late on the Sabbath day, as 
it began to dawn toward the first day of the 
week," etc. The first day of the week is 
never called the "Sabbath" anywhere in the 
entire scriptures. The foregoing quotation 
shows that the "Sabbath" was Saturday and 
not Sunda}^. We should call scriptural things 
b} r the correct scriptural names, and not ap- 
ply a Bible name for one institution or day to 
an altogether different institution or day. To 
do so is inevitably productive of confusion. 

When we call the first day of the week 
the "Sabbath" we do by that ver}" act teach 



18 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

our hearers that we ought to observe the 
"Sabbath" day. By constant use of the term 
in that way we impress upon the minds of old 
and young the thought that "Sabbath" of the 
decalogue is a binding obligation upon Christ- 
ians. By and by the Sabbatarian comes along 
and it is but a moment's work to prove that 
Saturday and not Sunday, was the Sabbath. 
He then presents the matter thus: — "If you 
are going to observe the "Sabbath" }^ou are 
keeping^the wrong day — for Saturday and not 
Sunday is the "Sabbath." And upon the 
strength of this plea many are lead to go 
back to Judaism and try to keep the Sab- 
bath of the law. Thus, by applying the term 
"Sabbath" to the first day of the week we are 
playing directly into the hands of the Sab- 
batarians. 

Sunday keepers, and especially preach- 
ers by virtue of this unscriptural nomencla- 
ture are responsible for most of the success 
of Seventh-day Adventists. It is also error 
to talk about a "change of the Sabbath". 
There never was any change of the Sabbath 
from Saturday to Sunday. There is not, at 
any place in the Bible, any intimation of any 
such change. 

The Sabbath belonged to Judaism. It 
was abolished (Col. 2:13-17). As an institu- 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 19 

tion it died with the law of which it was 
a part, just as the Passover, the Pentecost, 
and the feast of Tabernacles perished with 
the old law. The Lord'sday belongs distinct- 
ively to Christianity, It is a new institution. 
It does not take the place of the Sabbath. It 
has nothing to do with the Sabbath. The old 
passover of the law was abolished. The 
Lord's Supper was instituted. But the Sup- 
per does not take the place of the Passover. 
They are two separate and distinct institu- 
tions belonging to two distinct dispensations. 
Likewise, the Sabbath and the Lord'sday be- 
long to two essentially distinct systems. One 
does not take the place of the other. 

With Judaism the Sabbath was aborgated 
and with Christanity the Lord'sday arose. 
The Sabbath was commemorative of God's 
rest from creation on the seventh-day and al- 
so of Israel's deliverance from the bondage of 
Egypt, while the Lord'sday is a memorial of 
the triumph of Jesus over the powers of 
death. The one arose under the reign of 
Moses. The other under the eys of the apos- 
tles. We cannot base first-day observance on 
the fourth precept of the decologue. If that 
commands anything, it is seventh-day obser- 
vance. We must establish the authority of 
the first day whooly independant of the deca- 



20 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

logue. The decalogue was a part of the 
Mosaic system and the Sabbath went down 
with the system of which it was a part. We 
shall enter into no discussion of the abolation 
of the old law of Moses in this book. Such is 
not our purpose. We are here simply mak- 
ing certain observations, elementry in their 
nature, which are necessary to a proper com- 
prehension of this volume. The Cross of 
Christ seems to be set forth in the New Tes- 
tament as the point where the old law was 
abolished (Col. 2:13-17. Before that, the Sab- 
bath was of binding obligation. 

We may not expect to find first- day ob- 
servance actually established before the death 
of Christ. Somewhere this side the death and 
resurrection of Jesus and during the Apostolic 
age we may expect to find some account of 
the observance of the day— that is if said ob- 
servance is to be supported by Apostolic sanc- 
tion. Let Sunday observers set forth a 
proper distinction between Judaism and 
Christanity, quit talking about a ''Change of 
the Sabbath," stop applying the term "Sab- 
bath" to Sunday, and base Sunday observ- 
ance, not upon the decalogue, but upon the 
practice of the church while under Apostolic 
supervision, and Seventh-day Adventists 
preachers will soon be starving. But to call 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 21 

Sunday the "Sabbath," to base Sunday ob- 
servance upon the fourth precept of the dec- 
alogue, to try to prove a "change of Sabbath" 
from Saturday to Sunday, is simply to sur- 
render the ship without firing a shot. 



The Seventh/day Adventist 
False Prophetess. 



Seventh-day Adventists have a so-called 
prophetess in their camp. This fact is not as 
well known as it should be. In a Supplement 
to the Worthingion (Minn.) Advance, on April 
30, 1891, there appeared an article, concern- 
ing this modern claimant to inspiration, from 
the pen of the author of this book. Immed- 
iately following the article in the same paper 
there was printed a certificate, signed by 
the leading citizens of Worthington, showing 
that Mrs. White has revised and otherwise 
mutilated her divinely inspired revelations. 
We here reprint the article and also the cer- 
tificate. 

SUPPLEMENT TO WOKTHINGTON ADVANCE. 
Published April 30, 1891. 

Editor Advance: — It is a fact not gen- 
erally known, that Seventh- day Adventists 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 23 

have an alleged inspired prophetess in their 
church. Her name is Ellen G. White. Sev- 
enth-day Adventists are great sticklers for 
the Bible, they are governed wholly by the 
Bible, so they claim. But somehow they for- 
get to tell the public that in addition to the 
Bible they publish ten bound volumes of the 
writings of Mrs. E. G. White as being revela- 
tions from God. It is wholly impossible for 
any one to be a consistent member of this 
church and not accept Ellen G. White as di- 
vinely inspired. A few quotations from 
works now lying before me, will give an idea 
of the place assigned Mrs. White in the 
church. In a tract headed "Canright vs. 
Canright," now being distributed by Seventh- 
day Adventists, I find the following: Page 13. 

"From the very start of this message Sister "White 
has been ultimately connected with it, Ever since 
1845 she has had her visions frequently, and they have 
had an important bearing upon the work." 

"Not a move of any importance has ever been in 
any department of the work but she has spoken in the 
testimonies supporting it." 

Again on page 16: 

"All the leading men among us, those of the very 
strongest minds and the best talents, and who have 
had every facility for more than a quarter of a century, 
to become thoroughly acquainted with Sistei White 



24 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

and her writings, have the strongest faith in her testi- 
monies. " 

The above named tract contains matter 
from the pen of D. M. Canright, originally 
published in 1877 in the Review and Herald. 
Mr. Canright has since repudiated Seventh- 
day Adventism and has written extensively 
against it. They now publish his former 
writings as a reply to his present efforts 
against them; thereby approving the position 
taken in the tract just quoted. 

Mrs. White says, ''Testimony for the 
church," No. 33, page 208. 

"If God has given me a message to bear to his peo- 
ple, those who would hinder me in the work and lessen 
the faith of the people in its truth, are not fighting 
against the instrument, but against God. It is not the 
instrument whom you slight and insult, but God. who 
has spoken to you in the warnings and reproofs. It is 
hardly possible for men to offer a greater insult to God 
than to depise and reject the instrumentalities that he 
has appointed to lead them." 

There you have it, simon pure — those 
who fight the ''testimonies" are fighting God. 
It is hardly possible to offer to God a greater 
insult than to reject Mrs. White's claim to in- 
spiration. 

The claims of Mrs. White and the pecu- 
liar doctrines of Seventh-day Adventists, 
stand or fall together. Mrs. White has been 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 25 

prominent in the church ever since its organ- 
ization. She has been and is now its inspired 
leader. I submit this proposition: the true 
living God would not permit an impostor to 
]ead his people. This is evident — it needs no 
argument to support it. Has there ever been 
a time when an impostor has been the choosen 
and actual leader of God's people for a long 
period of years? Never. Is there any man 
— believer or infidel — that can believe that 
God would raise up a people to proclaim the 
last message to a lost world and then permit 
or allow that people to be led for forty-fiVe 
years by a false prophetess? I contend that 
the whole system of Seventh-day Adventism 
stands or falls with the pretentions of Mrs. 
White. If she is a true prophetess, then they 
are the true people of God — and vice- versa. 

The question of Mrs. White's inspiration 
is of tremendous importance to the world. 
Look at Seventh-day Adventists. They 
preach the immediate coming of Christ — that 
we are now in the last days — observance of 
the Jewish Sabbath — feet washing as a church 
ordinance — the sleep of the dead — and claim 
to be delivering the last word of warning to a 
world sunk in ruin. Shall we give heed to 
their peculiar doctrines? If the}" are true, 



26 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

and we reject them, we are forever lost. 
There can be no better test than to examine 
the claims of their inspired leader. Is she a 
fraud? Then the whole thing as a system 
may be set down as being of like nature. 

The proof that she is a false prophetess 
is found in the fact that under her own eye, 
some of her writings are suppressed. The 
statement made by thirty of the citizens of 
Worthington, accompanying this article, is 
incontrovertible evidence that she has and 
does deal deceitfully with her visions, and 
knowingly deceives the world. It may be 
asked, why are the above mentioned passages 
suppressed? 

Undoubtedly because some of them con- 
tain doctrines not now believed, either by 
Mrs. White or the Seventh-day Adventist 
church.. In the Sixth suppression pointed 
out in the statement accompanying this arti- 
cle, it will be seen that Mrs. White applies 
the number 666 (Rev. 13:18) to the 'Image 
Beast." This neither Mrs. White nor the 
church now accept. They now apply the 
number 666 to the papac}^. They explain the 
"Image Beast" to be the United States. Of 
course the suppressed passage is at variance 
with their present belief and so had to be 
suppressed. That the other suppressions 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 27 

are also tinctured with doctrines now reject- 
ed by Mrs. White might also be shown. 

Mrs. White says, ''Testimony No. 33, 
page 205:'' 

"Let none entertain the thought I regret or take 
back any plain testimony I have borne to individuals 
or to the people." 

This was published in the j'ear 1889. 
But it comes with poor grace from one, who 
for forty years has suffered her own inspired 
testimony to be suppressed, as is abundantly 
shown in the statement. 

In Testimony No. 31, page 63, Mrs. 
White says: 

"In these letters I write in the testimonies I bear, 
I am presenting to you that which the Lord has pre- 
sented to me. I do not write one article in the paper 
expressing merely my own ideas. They are what God 
has opened before me in vision — the precious rays of 
light shining from the throne." 

Thus she claims the very highest inspir- 
ation. 

In Testimony No. 22, page 189, she says: 
"In ancient times God spoke to men by the mouths 
of prophets and apostles. In these days He speaks to 
them by the testimonies of His spirit." 

Wonder if the prophets and apostles re- 
vised and suppressed their inspired writings 
so that we now have only a part of the orig- 
inal revelation? Perhaps it was left Mrs. 
White and Seventh-day Adventists to teach 
the world that peculiar art. 



28 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

The suppressions involve not merely 
Mrs. White's pretensions, but also impeach 
the integrity of the foremost men of the body, 
for without them as accessories the suppres- 
sions could hardly have been made. 

The powers of hell were never to prevail 
against the true church, but surely the 
powers of hell have prevailed against Seventh- 
day Adventism, for they are and always have 
been led by an impostor. Had we space we 
might easily show where her testimonies not 
only contradict the Bible, but also contradict 
themselves. In the foregoing I have only 
given a taste of the strong meat of Seventh- 
day Adventism. John M, Vankirk. 

CERTIFICATE. ■ 

We, the undersigned, citizens of Worth- 
ington, Nobles county, Minesota, having ex- 
amined a work entitled ' ' A Word to the Little 
Flock," published by James White, in 1847, 
and also a book entitled "Early Writings of 
Mrs. White," published in 1882, certify: 

1st. That we find on pages 14, 15, 16, 17 
and 18 of a "A Word to the Little Flock," a 
"Vision" by Mrs. E. G. White, entitled "To 
the Remnant Scattered Abroad." 

2nd. That we find on pages 9, 10, 11, 12 
13, 14 and 15 of "Early Writings of Mrs 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 29 

"White," as published in 1882, an alleged re- 
publication of this same "Vision." 

Having compared the 1882 republication 
of this " Vision" with the original as found in 
"A Word to the Little Flock;" we find the 
following omissions in the 1882 republication. 

Immediately following the close of the 
sentence ending with a period in the 46th line 
(1882 republication) we find an omission of 
three lines, containing 39 words, found in the 
original; as follows: 

"It was just as impossible for them to get on the 
path again and go to the city as all the wicked world 
which God had rejected. They fell all the way along 
the path one after another until." 

At the close of the 144th line (middle of 
page 13; we find omitted 22 lines, containing 
284 words, as follows: 

" And as we were gazing at the glories of the place 
our eyes were attracted upwards to something that had 
the appearance of silver. I asked Jesus to let me see 
what was within there. In a moment we were winging 
our way upward, and entering in; here we saw good old 
father Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Noah, Daniel and many 
like them. And I saw a vail with a heavy fringe of sil- 
ver and gold, as a border on the bottom; it was very 
beautiful. I asked Jesus what was within the vail. He 
raised it with his own right arm, and bade me take 
heed. I saw there a glorious ark, overlaid with pure 
gold, and it had a glorious border, resembling Jesus' 
crowns; and on it were two bright angels — their wings 



30 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

were spread over the ark as they sat on each end, with 
their faces turned towards each other and looking down- 
ward. In the ark, beneath where the angel's wings 
were spread, was a golden pot of Manna, of a yePow- 
ish cast; and I saw a rod, which Jesus said was Aa- 
ron's; I saw it bud, blossom and bear fruit, and I saw 
two long golden rods, on which hung silver wires, and 
on the wires most glorious grapes; one cluster was 
more than a man here could carry. And I saw Jesus 
step up and take of the manna, almonds, grapes and 
pomegranates, and bear them down to the city, and 
place them on the supper table. I stepped up to see 
how much was taken away, and there was just as much 
left; and we shouted Hallelujah — Amen. We all de- 
scended from this place down into the city, and" 

At the close of the 204th line (bottom 
page 14), we find omitted nearly two lines, con- 
taining' 23 words; as follows: 

''Well, bless the Lord dear brethren and sisters, 
it is an extra meeting for those who have the seal of the 
living God." 

Following" the close of the sentence ending 
with a period in the 222nd line (page 15) we 
find ommitted one sentence, containing six 
words, as follows: 

" We all reclined at the table." 

Also, on pages 18, 19 and 20 of "A Word 
to the Little Flock," we find a u vision" by 
Mrs. E. G. White contained in a letter written 
to Joseph Bates, dated Topsham, Me., April 
7, 1847. 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 31 

On pages 25, 26 and 27 of "Early Writ 
ings of Mrs. White," published in 1882, we 
find an alleged republication of this "vision. " 

At the close of the 59th line (page 27) we 
find an omission of lour lines, containing 47 
words, as follows: 

"And if one believed, and kept the Sabbath, and 
received the blessings attending it, and then gave it up 
and broke the holy commandment; they would shut the 
gates of the Holy City against themselves as sure as 
there was a God that rules in heaven above. " 

At the close of the 73rd line (page 27) we 
find a second omission of eight lines, contain- 
ing 97 words, as follows: 

• k I saw all that 'would not receive the mark of the 
Beast and of his Image, in their foreheads or in their 
hands,' could not buy or sell. I saw that the number 
(666) of the Image Beast was made up; and that it was 
the beast that changed the Sabbath, and the Image 
Beast had followed on after, and kept the Pope's and 
not God's Sabbath. And all we were required to do, 
was to give up God's Sabbath, and keep the Pope's, and 
then we should have the mark of the Beast and of his 
Image." 

Upon pages 58, 59, 60, 61, 67, 68, 69 and 
70 of "Testimonies for the Churches," Vol. 
1, we find an alleged republication of the "Vis- 
ion" entitled "To the Remnant, Scattered 
Abroad." Upon examination we find a sup- 
pression of the same passage as in "Early 



32 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

Writings of Mrs. White," published in 1882. 
We further find that the "Vision" as origi- 
nal^ published by James White in 1847 is 
here divided and published as two different 
"Visions," under the headings Chapter VII. 
"My First Vision," and Chapter IX "Vision 
of the New Earth," with nearly six pages of 
other matter between them, under the head- 
ing, Chapter VIII, "Call to Travel," (page62). 

Robert McCune, Ed. Advance, and Act- 
ing Pastor Presbyterian Ch. 

Wm. Brown, Pastor M. E. Ch. 

8. Anderson, Pastor of the Swedish 
Lutheran Church. 

Franklin L. Fisk, Pastor of the Congre- 
gational Church. 

S. B. Goetz, Pastor of the Evangelical 
Church. 

Geo. O. Moore, M. D. Cashier Bank of 
Worthington. 
John Ledene, Merchant Tailor. 

H. M. Palm, Furniture Dealer. 

F. H. Day, Jeweler. 

C. T. Shattuck, Carriage Maker. 

David Anderson. 

Geo. J. Day, Real Estate and Loans. 

W. H. Buchan, Engineer. 

W. S. Webb, M. D. 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 33 

E. F. Buchan, Photographer. 

W. W. Loveless, Proprietor of Lake View 
House. 

S. V. Wyckoff, Merchant. 

Geo. D. Dayton, Banker. 

H. D. Ludlow. 

Peter Thompson, Pres' Nobles county 
Bank. 

Frank Lewis, Merchant. 

Daniel Rohrer, Attorney. 

W. S. Lewis, Merchant. 

A. L. Johnson, Hardware. 

C. W. Smith, Druggist. 

C. P. Shepherd, Merchant. 

Ray Humiston, Di uggist. 

E. E. Warren. 

J. S. McManus, Merchant. 

F. G. Martin, Ed. Globe. 

I hereby certify that I am well acquaint 
ed with the persons signing the above instru- 
ment; that they are citizens of Worthington, 
and that the signatures are genuine. 

[Seal] Milton P. Mann, 

Notary Public, Nobles county, Minn. 

When Seventh-day Adventists go out to 

hold meetings they say nothing about Mrs. 

White. When confronted by the cold facts, 

they will, as long as there is any chance, deny 



T4 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

that she is recognized by the church as di- 
vinely inspired. When cornered by one who 
knows, they will admit that they do so regard 
her. Without stopping to count them we would 
place the number of her inspired volumes at 
between fifteen and twenty. And inasmuch 
as we have had rare opportunities to investi- 
gate this matter and are well prepared to ex- 
pose this modern impostor and deceiver, it is 
our intention to publish a small book shortly, 
in which her relation to Seventh-day Adven- 
tism win be shown and her claims exposed. 
If the people get a taste of the strong meat 
of Seventh-day Adventism, before they are 
duped and blinded by prejudice, they are in 
but little danger of taking up with it. It 
should be remarked that not all Sabbatarians 
accept Mrs. White's inspiration. That fac- 
tion known as "Seventh-day Adventists" 
with headquarters at Battle Creek, Mich., ac- 
cept Mrs. White's claims. They are the ones 
most commonly met with. 



Chapter L 

THE LORD'S DAY. 

{He kuriake hemera. ) 

I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day. — John in 
Rev, 1:10 

Sect. 1 The expression, "The Lord's 
day" is found only once in the New Testa- 
ment scriptures. The place of its sole occur- 
ence is indicated above. Our English New 
Testament is translated from the Greek. It 
is not the intention to proceed in this investi- 
gation in a tongue unknown to most of our 
readers, and yet a study of the Greek origi- 
nal of the expression now under consideration 
is unavoidable. A glance at the beginning of 
this chapter will show a transliteration int> 
English of the Greek words translated "The 
Lord's day." And right here our readers 
should understand also, that the Greek word 



36 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

kuriake is not a noun, as the English transla- 
tion might seem to suggest. It is an adjec- 
tive, and some writers have suggested, not 
without reason, that it would be more accur- 
ate to translate this passage "the Lordian 
day." Our first duty will be to ascertain the 
meaning of this Greek adjective. {Kuriake 
and kuriakos are merely the same word ter- 
minating differently.) 



Sect, 2. Kuriakos is thus defined by the 
lexicographers : — 
Liddell & Scott. 

*' Kuriakos, of, belonging to, concerning a lord or 
master; esp, belonging to the Lord (Christ): hence he 
kvriake hemera, the Lord's day, dies donimica, N. T.; to 
kuriakou, the Lord's house, Eccl., whence our kyrke, 
church." 

Sophocles. Greek Lexicon of the Roman and 
Byzantine Periods. From B. C. 146 to A. D. 
1100. 

"Kuriakos, the Lord's. Paul, 1 Cor. 11:20, deipnon 
* * he kuriake hemera, the Lord's day, Sunday. Apoc. 
1:10." 

Robinson. Greek and English Lexicon. 

"Kuriakos, pertaining to the Lord i. e. the Messiah. 
1 Cor. 11:20. kuriakon deipnon, the Lord's supper. 
Rev. 1:10. kuriake hemera, the Lord's day," 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 37 

Westcott and Hort. 

"Kuriakos, pertaining to the Lord Jesus Christ, the 
Lord's. 1 Cor. 11:20. Rev. 1:10. N. T. 

Greenfield. 

"Kuriakos, of or pertaining to the Lord, i. e., the 
Messiah, the Lord's. 1. Cor. 11:20: Rev, 1:10 (Wag 
goner and Vogel Debate, p. 110.) 

Cremer. Biblico-Theological Lexicon of N. 
T. Greek. 

"Kuriakos, belonging to a lord or ruler * * In the 
New Testament and ecclesiastical Greek as — belonging 
to Christ, to the L}rd; having special reference to him, 
e g. 1 Cor. 11:20, kwriaTon deipnon of the Holy Supper. 
R3V. 1:10, kuriake hemsra seems to be analogous to this; 
in the early church it was universally understood to 
denote Sunday, the day kept in commemoration of 
Christ's resurrection," 

Bagster's Analytical Greek Lexicon. 

"Kuriakos — Pertaining to the Lord Jesus Christ; 
the Lord [1 Cor. 11:20; Re^. 1:10.]" (Canright's 
Seventh-day Ad ventism Renounced, p 191.) 

A. Rauschenbauch, Professor in Rochester, 
N. Y., German Theological Seminary says: — 
"The first day of the week. Called in Rev. 1:10, 
'The Lord's day.' The Greek word in the latter pas- 
sage is kuriahe an adjective from kurios, and the words 
kuriake hemera in R^v. 1:10, are rightly translated 'The 
Lord's day,' i. e., a day consecrated or belonging to 
the Lord. From this expression, at least from the se- 
cond century, all Greek-speaking Christendom has 
called Sunday kuriake, i, e., the Lord's day." (Well- 
come's The Lord's Day Vindicated, p. 44.) 



38 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

If the unanimous testimony of these lexico- 
graphers does not establish the meaning of 
kuriake, then it is folly to attempt the defin- 
ing of any word. Without exception they 
convey the idea that huriahe means pertaining 
to Christ. Kuriahe hemera must therefore 
point to a day established or celebrated es- 
pecially in honor of Christ. And it also 
seems that the word has reference to Jesus 
as the Christ or Messiah. Christ and Messiah 
are equivalent terms. The former being the 
English form of a Greek word meaning "the 
anointed one," and the latter the English 
form of a Hebrew term meaning exactly the 
same. 

The day referred to, is, then, one estab- 
lished or celebrated in honor of Jesus as "the 
anointed one.'' When did Jesus become "the 
anointed one?" Certainly not until he was 
anointed. In Acts 10:38 we read of Jesus, 
"how that God anointed him with the Holy 
Ghost and with power." And was not Jesus 
anointed with the Ho]y Spirit at the time of 
his baptism? The record (Matt. 3:16) de- 
clares that "Jesus, when he was baptized, 
went up straightway from the water: and lo, 
the heavens were opened unto him, and he 
saw the spirit of God descending as a dove, 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 39 

and coming upon him." Where then shall we 
look for the origin and observance of the 
Lord's day? At creation? Among the patri- 
archs? At Sinai? Absurd!!! This Lord's 
day could have no existence until Jesus be- 
came the Christ — or anointed one — for it is a 
day especiaily belonging to him as the Lord 
Christ. 

(Jesus was not the Christ until during 
his earthly ministry. It is true he existed as 
the Word (Jno. 1:1-2) in the beginning, but as 
he was not the Son until born into the world, 
neither did he sustain the official relationship 
of Messiah, until anointed.) 



Sect. 3. The Sabbath was commemora- 
tive of two facts. Ex. 20:11 — "For in six 
days the Lord made heaven and earth, the 
sea, and all that in them is, and rested the 
seventh day; wherefore the Lord blessed the 
Sabbath day and hallowed it." 

Equally important upon this point is 
Deut. 5:15 — "And thou shalt remember that 
thou wast a servant in the land of Egypt, and 
the Lord thy God brought thee out hence by 
a mighty hand and by a stretched out arm; 
therefore the Lord thy God commanded thee 



40 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

to keep the Sabbath day." 

The Sabbath was to the Israelite com- 
memorative, (1) of the rest of God from the 
work of creation, and (2) of the deliverance of 
Israel from the slavery in Egypt. It could 
not have been given as an institution for ob- 
servance, until both of these events were in 
the past. As a matter of fact it was first 
given to the Israelites while in the wilder- 
ness. Certain it is that none will place its 
origin later tnan this period. The fact that 
its observance was instituted fifteen centur- 
ies before the Christian Era is decisive 
against the Sabbath day being "the Lord's 
day" of Rev. 1:10. The ministry of Christ 
did not begin until fifteen hundred years af- 
ter the Sabbath was commanded. "The 
Lord's day" from the ascertained meaning of 
kuriakos, is a day pertaining especially to 
Christ. The Sabbath is therefore fifteen cen- 
turies too early to successfully claim for it- 
self the honor of being "the Lord's day" of 
Rev. 1:10. Sabbatarians claim for the Sab- 
bath still greater antiquity than is here con- 
ceded. Very well, the more ancient they 
prove it to be, that much more conclusive it 
is that it cannot be the kariake hemera, or 
"Lord's day," which, by all authority, has its 
roots in the Messiahseip of Jesus. The Sab- 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 41 

bath was neither instituted nor celebrated in 
honor of Christ. 



Sect. 4. To what day does John refer? 
How shall we determine? Let us first hear 
the law for ascertaining the meaning of 
words. 

Blackstone in the Introduction to his Com- 
mentary on the Laws of England, page 59 
says: — 

"Words are generally to be understood in their us- 
ual and'most known signification; not so much regard- 
ing the propriety of grammer, as their general and 
popular use." 

Greenleaf in the Law of Evidence, Sect. 278, 
gives the same rule: — 

"The terms of every written instrument are to bs 
understood in their plain, ordinary, and popular 
sense." 

Let us also hear Dr. Charles Hodge, the Pres- 
byterian, in his Systematic Theology, vol. 1, 
p. 376. 

''The fundamental law of interpretation of all 
writings, sacred and profane, is that words are to be 
understood in their historical sense in which it can be 
historically proved that they were used by their au- 
thor; and intended to be understood by those to whom 
they were addressed. The object of language is th 



42 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

ccirmunication of thought. Unless words are taken in 
the sense in which those who employ them 
know they will be understood, they will fail of 
their design." (Christian Immersion, pp. 8-9.) 
T. H. Home, as quoted by Briney in The Form 
of Baptism, pp. 20-21, states the rule quiet 
fully:- 

"Since words compose sentences, and from these, 
rightly understood, the meaning of an author is to be 
collected, it is necessary that we ascertain the individ- 
ual meaning of words before we proceed further to in- 
vestigate the sense of scripture. In the prosecution of 
this important work, we may observe, generally, that 
as the same method and same principles of interpreta- 
tion are common both to the sacred volume and to the 
productions of uninspired men, consequently the sig- 
nification of words in the Holy Scriptures must be 
sought precisely in the same way in which the meaning 
of words in other works is or ought to be sought. 
Hence, also, it follows that the method of investigating 
the signification of words in the Bible is no more arbi- 
trary than it is in other books, bat is in like manner 
regulated by certain laws drawn from the nature of 
language. And since no text of scripture has more 
than one meaning, we must endeavor to find that one 
true sense precisely in the same manner as we would 
investigate the sense of Homer, or any other ancient 
writer." 

" Ascertain the usus loquendi [Usage in speaking] , 
or notion affixed to a word by the persons in general by 
whom the language either is now or formerly was 
spoken, and especially in the particular connection in 
which such notion is affixed." 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 43 

These Laws of Interpretation are so self- 
evident as to require no comment. When 
John used the term "Lord's day" in Rev. 1:- 
10, he did not stop and define the term. It 
was not necessary. No doubt these words 
had a well defined meaning and all Christians 
would understand them without any explana- 
tion. Unless John used the term "Lord's 
day" in its commonly accepted signification 
his words would fail to be intelligible to his 
readers. His message would not be a "Reve- 
lation" (ch. 1:1). When he used the word 
"Patmos" (ch. 1:9) he referred to an island 
popularly known by that name. When he used 
the word "spirit" (ch. 1:10) he used the word 
no doubt as the Christian world generally 
used it. To say that he used kuriake hemera 
otherwise is to make him an ignoramus or a 
deceiver. 

At the present stage of our investigation 
we shall not enter fully into the history of the 
use of this term. Let a single quotation from 
Smith's Bible Dictionary suffice now. Under 
the head of "Lord's day" this high authority 
says: — 

" It has been questioned, though not seriously un- 
til of late years, what is the meaning of the phrase he 
kuriake hemera, which occurs in one passage only of the 
Holy Scripture, Rev. 1:10, and is, in our English ver- 



44 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

sion, translated "The Lord's Day.'' The general con- 
sent both of Christian antiquity and of modern divines 
has referred it to the weekly festival of our Lord's res- 
urrection, and identified it with 'the first-day of the 
week,' on which he rose, with the patristical 'eighth 
day,' or 'day which is both the first and the eighth,' in 
fact, with the "Solis Dies,' or 'Sunday,' of every age of 
the church. But the views antagonistic to this general 
consent deserve at least a passing notice. Some have 
supposed St. John to be speaking, in the passage above 
referred to, of the Sabbath, because that institution is 
called in Isaiah 58:13, by the Almighty Himself, 'My 
holy day.' To this it is replied — If St. John had in- 
tended to specify the Sabbath, he would surely have 
used that word which was by no means obsolete, or 
even obsolescent, at the time of his composing the book 
of the Revelation. And it is added, that if an Apostle 
had set the example of confounding the seventh and the 
first days of the week, it would have been strange in- 
deed that every ecclesiastical writer for the first five 
centuries should have avoided any approach to such 
confusion. They do avoid it — for as sabbaton is never 
used by them for the first day, so kuriake is never used 
by them for the seventh day." 

As an authority Smith's Bible Dictionary 
stands in the front line. Let me repeat and 
emphasize the concluding words of the forego- 
ing quotation. u As sabbaton [Greek for Sab- 
bath] is never used by them for the first day, so 
kuriake is never used by them for the seventh 
day. ' ' 

The man does not live who can success- 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 45 

fully dispute that declaration. For the first 
five hundred years of the Church's history 
kuriake always designated the first day of the 
week. This was the popular, general, histor- 
ic use of the word. 

To what day, then, does John refer? Un- 
questionably to the first-day of the week. For 
a like period of five hundred years Christian 
writers never apply kuriake to the Sabbath. 
And certainly John does not use the word, 
without any explanation whatever, in a sense 
wholly foreign to popular usage. To dissent 
from these conclusions is to repudiate the es- 
tablished canons for the interpretation of lan- 
guage, or else to deny the facts of history. 



Sec. 5. The word kuriakos occuurs but 
twice in the New Testament. With one of its 
occurances we are already familiar. The 
other passage containing the word is 1 Cor. 
11:20, "When therefore ye assemble your- 
selves together, it is not possible to eat the 
Lord c s Supper." In this place "Lord's" is 
a translation of the same adjective found in 
Rev. 1:10.. Of its meaning in 1 Cor. 11:20 
there can be no doubt. It refers to a supper 
that had its origin in the appointment of 



46 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

Christ. The celebration of this institution is 
in rememberance of the great sacrifice. And 
just as kuriakos here unquestionably points 
to a supper celebrated especially in honor of 
Christ, just so in Rev. 1:10 does it as un- 
questionably point to a day, the celebration of 
which, especially pertains to the Christ. 
Thus, all probable, or even possible reference 
to the Sabbath is effectually cut off. The 
The Sabbath was in no sense celebrated in 
honor of Christ. It had its origin fifteen 
centuries before the Christ appeared. For 
evidence that kuriakos occurs but twice in the 
New Testament see, Sec. 44, M'Ciintock & 
Strong Ency., Article, Sabbath. Also Sect. 
48, Albert Barnes on Rev. 1:10. 



Sect. 6. The apostles gave to the word 
kuriakos an existance. It never appears in 
any Literature prior to the New Testamnet 
writings. It is a word of apostolic origin. 
The Authors of Liddle & Scott's Gr.-Eng. 
Lex., iu the Preface to that work say: — 

"Our plan has been that marked out and begun 
by Passow, viz., to make each article a history of the usage 
of the word rnferred to. That is, we have always sought 
to give the earliest authority for its use first. Then, if 
no change was introduced by later writers, we have 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 47 

left it with that early authority alone." 

By referring back to Sect. 2 the reader 
will see that Liddell and Scott give the New 
Testament as the earliest authority for the 
use of kuriakos. 

Winer's N. T. Gram. p. 236 testifies as fol- 
lows: — 

"Yet the New Testament is by no means poor in 
adjectives; it can show a considerate number which do 
not occur iu the (early) Greek authors, and som? of 
which have been formed by the apostles themselves." 

And under this head this author cites 
kuriakos. On p. 25 the same authority says 
that 

"Entirely new words and phrases were construc- 
ted, mainly by composition and for the m:>st part to 
meet some sensible want." 

The fact that ku-Uakos is of Apostolic or- 
igin is full of meaning. The Apostles formed 
this word no doubt "to meet some sensible 
want." They had two new institutions to 
name— the one a memorial of the Savior's 
great sacrifice for sin, the other a day cele- 
brated in honor of the Messiah's triumphs 
over the powers of sin and death — hence a 
new term is coined by which to designate 
these institutions. 

This again cuts off all probable reference 
to the Sabbath. If John intended to desist- 



48 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

nate the seventh day of the week, why did he 
not use the usual word — Sabbath — for that 
purpose? The word "Sabbath" had been in 
current use for fifteen centuries and was un- 
derstood the world over — but when John 
speaks of the "Lord's day" of the Christian 
Era, he discards this ancient term and adopts 
the newly formed kursakos. 

Sect. 7. In his Gospe], John refers to 
the seventh day of the week at least eleven 
times. See the following passages: — John 5: 
9, 10, 16, 18,-7:22, 23—9:14, 16—19:31. And 
each time he designates it by the word "Sab- 
bath*" Not once does he apply to it the 
name kuriake hemera. If in Rev. 1:10 he had 
meant the seventh day of the week, no doubt 
he would have designated it, as he always 
does in his Gospel, by the word "Sabbath." 
The fact that the Evangelists refer to the 
first-day of the week without using the term 
kuriakos, does not prove that this term was 
not properly applied to the first-day when it 
was used in the Apostolic age. We more often 
employ the term "Sunday" than "Lord's day" 
in designating the first-day and yet all pro- 
fessed Christians, with the exception of a 
mere handful, always apply "Lord's day" 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 49 

when they do employ that term, to mean the 
first-day of the week. 



Sect. 8. Sabbatarians argue that the 
Sabbath must be referred to in Rev: 1:10, be 
cause in Isa. 58:13 God speaks of the Sabbath 
as "my holy day." This conclusion however 
does not follow. (1). The language in Isaiah 
was uttered in the Jewish dispensation. 
When Isaiah was written the Sabbath was 
God's holy day. That fact, however, gives 
no clue whatever as to what may be the 
"Lord's day" in another distinct and succeed- 
ing dispensation. In Lev. 23:2 we find these 
words: u The set feasts of the Lord, which 
ye shall proclaim to be holy convocations, 
even these are my set feasts" — and following 
in the same chapter is the law of the Pass- 
over, the Pentecost, and the feast of Taber- 
nacles. God said of them 'These are my 
set feasts. That, however, proves nothing 
as to what God's feasts are now. That de- 
claration was made in another and preceding 
dispensation, to those under the law. We 
are not under the law (Gal. 3:23-25). Like- 
wise the declaration in Isaiah concerning the 
Sabbath furnishes not the remotest hint as to 
what day is now — in this succeeding Chris- 



50 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

tian dispensation — the "Lord's day." (2). 
Kuriakos does not occur in Isaiah. This word 
had no existence until coined by the Apostles 
seven hundred years after Isaiah's day. 
Hence it is sheer nonsense to attempt an in- 
terpretation of Rev. 1:10 by reference to Isa. 
58:13. Kuriakos hemera was never, in any age, 
by any inspired man, ever applied to the 
seventh day of the week. 



Sect. 9. Occasionally an attempt is made 
by Sabbatarians to torture Mark 2:28 into an 
interpretation of Rev. 1:10. A full explana- 
tion of this passage is not within the scope of 
this work. Read in full Mark 2:23-28, and 
the parallel passage, Matt. 12:1-8. Notice 
the Saviour's logic, "The Sabbath was made 
for man, and not man for the Sabbath: so that 
the Son of man is lord even of the Sabbath." 
That is, in the same sense that man, i. e., a 
human being, was lord of the Sabbath, Jesus 
asserts that he was lord of it. He bases his 
claim to lordship, not upon the fact of his di- 
vinity, but expressly upon the fact that he 
was the Son of man, i. e., a human being. He 
only claims the lordship that other men pos- 
sessed. Nothing is hinted here as to the 
Sabbath being the "Lord's day" of the Chris- 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 51 

tian dispensation. Jesus asserts no prefer- 
ence for the Sabbath, He only claims, that 
he, like other men, was lord of the day, by 
virtue of the fact that the law of mercy that 
should prevail among men, is paramount to 
Sabbath laws (Sabbath laws here being classed 
under the head of "sacrifice," Matt. 12:7) 
The argument of Jesus is an ad hominem one, 
and the fore-going brief exposition of this 
passage is based upon certain facts and prin- 
ciples, held or admitted by the Jews, and 
which Jesus here makes the basis of his reply 
to them. It matters not what this passage 
may teach so far as Rev. 1:10 is concerned. 
Rev. 1:10 belongs to the gospel dispensation, 
while Mark 2:28 belongs to the Jewish dis- 
pensation — the law of sacrifices and Sabbath 
observance continued until the cross (Col. 2: 
13-17. Jesus here makes no statement what- 
ever as to the "Lord's day" of the Christian 
dispensation. 



Chapter IL 



THE LORD'S DAY FROM A. D. 440 TO 
A. D. 63. 

Sect. 10. We shall now approach this 
question historically. Beginning down the 
stream of church history four hundred years, 
we shall ascend, tracing as we go, the obser- 
vance of the first day of the week as the 
Lord's day on up to the very threshold of the 
age Apostolic. We shall hear the testimony 
of those who lived in the century immediate- 
ly following the Apostles, We shall see the 
application of the term "Lord's day" in the 
early church. Concerning the "Fathers" of 
the church whose writings have been pre- 
served unto us and from whom we shall have 
occasion to quote, a few observations may 
here be proper. We do not quote them to get 
their opinions merely upon this question. 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 53 

We may give their opinions occasionally but 
simply as a matter information, not because 
we consider them binding upon us us. These 
''Fathers" may have held erroneous views in 
regard to many things. Their interpreta- 
tions of certain scriptures may seem to us 
fanciful. But they were honest men, some of 
them possessed of extraordinary ability, and, 
like Justice, ready- to die for the Master. As 
to matters of fact with which they were well 
acquainted, no better witnesses can be 
found. If the first-day of the week was ob- 
served as the "Lord's day'" by Christians 
generally, these men knew it. Their writings 
were for circulation at the time and place of 
their composition. Whatever statements 
they made about the matter, were, no doubt, 
in accordance with the facts. As to matters 
of fact about which they had personal knowl- 
edge there can be no reason for rejecting 
their testimony. There is a wide difference 
between a man's statement as a matter of fact 
and his opinion. Every man who has been 
about a court-room much understands this. 
We are all acquainted with many whose opin- 
ions we might reject, and whose interpreta- 
tions of certain scriptures we regard as silly 
— and yet were we sitting upon a jury, and 
these same persons were testifying as to ma 



54 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

ters that had come under their personal ob- 
servations, we would not think of discredit- 
ing them. So with the "Fathers." We do 
not affirm that their opinions, etc., are infalli- 
ble — we simply say that their statements 
made in the current literature of the church 
as to the practices of the church are worthy 
of acceptance, and that in their writings they 
have no doubt used such terms as "Lord's 
day" in the popular and generally accepted 
sense. Some of the quotations may seem to 
the uninitiated, to be uselessly long, but 
those who have had any experience in debat- 
ing with Sabbatarians will appreciate the 
lengthy extracts given. Having the full text 
before them, debators will be able to meet 
the misrepresentations and Ti serap-work" of 
their opponents with ease. 



Sect. 11. Sozomen, A. D. 440. We shall 
begin with Sozomen who wrote an Ecclesiasti- 
cal History about the year 440. His home 
was Constantinople, In Book 1, Chap. 8, of 
his Eccl. Hist,, in speaking of Con stan tine, 
he says: — 

'•He also enjoined the observance of the day, 
termed the Lord's day, which the Jews call the first- 
day of the week, and which the pagans dedicate to the 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 55 

sun, as likewise the day before the seventh, and com- 
manded that no judicial or other business should be 
transacted on those days, but God should be served 
with prayers and supplications He honored the 
Lord's day, because on it Christ arose from the dead.' 

The book of Revelation was probably- 
written in the year A. D. 96. Sozomen wrote 
three hundred and forty-four years later. 
At that time the first day of the week was 
known as the "Lord's day." 



Sect. 12- We shall next hear Augustine. 
He was born in Numidia, A. D. 354, converted 
to Christianity in 386 and died in the year 430. 
Of him the Ency. Brit, says: — u The theologi- 
cal position and influence of Augustine may 
be said to be unrivaled. No single 
name has ever exercised such power over the 
Christian church, and no one mind ever made 
such an impression upon Christian thought." 

We quote from Letter 55, chapter 13, the 
date of which may be set down as being ap- 
proximately A. D. 400. 

"The Lord's day, however, has been made known, 
not to the Jews, but to Christians, by the resurrection 
of the Lord, and from him it began to have the festive 
character, which is proper to it." 

Again: 

The reason being that the Lord might rather, in his 



56 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

own passion, declare the significance of that day, as he 
had come also to declare the mystery of the day now 
known as the Lord's day, the eighth namely, which is 
also the first-day of the week." 

Comment seems hardly necessary. The 
practice of the church and the use made of 
the term "Lord's day"' are clear in Augus- 
tine's time. 



Sect. 13. We now pass over seventy-six 
years of history and go back to A. D. 324, 
only 228 years this side of John in Rev. IPO. 
Eusebius is our witness, Before hearing 
we shall offer some evidence of his right to 
be heard on this question. It is customary 
for the enemies of the Lord's day to pass by 
with a sneer the testimony of these ancient 
writers. They are derided as being incom- 
petent and unreliable. The friends of the 
Lord's day are usually without the means of 
vindicating the trustworthiness of those who 
are quoted to establish the use of the term 
"Lord's day." We are about to quote from 
Eusebius. Who was he? Not one in ten 
thousand can tell! To acquaint Christians 
with these witnesses is a prime consideration 
in these pages. 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 57 

McClintock & Strong's Ency. says: — 
"Eusebius of Caesarea, the 'father of church 
history.' " "It is in the field of church his- 
tory that the merits and services of Eusebius 
stand pre-eminent among early writers. He 
had large acquaintance with both Christian 
and pagan learning, and used it, if not with 
critical and philosophical skill, yet with pa- 
tient industry and with literary integrity. 
He was the first to collect the scattered an- 
nals of the first three centuries of the church 
in his Ecclesiastical History, the most im- 
portant of all his writings, which trace the 
history of Christianity from the advent of the 
Messiah to the defeat of Licinius, A. D.. 324." 

Home's Introd. vol. 1, ch. 11, sect. 2, 
p. 79, has this to say of him: — "A man of ex- 
traordinary learning, diligence and judgment, 
and singularly studious in the scriptures." 
"His chief work is his Ecclesiastical History 
in which he records the history of Christian- 
ity from its commencement to his own time." 

With reference his Eccl. Hist, the Schaff- 
Herzog Ency. declares that "As a repertory 
of facts and documents, <his work is invalua- 
ble." 

The Ency. Brit, under the head of 
"Church History" says: — "During the six 



58 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

first centuries the Greek church furnished 
almost all that was valuable in church his- 
tory. " "At the head of the Greek school 
stand Eusebius, bishop of Caesarea in the 
earlier part of the fourth century, usually 
called the father of church history, although 
that title strictly belongs to Hegesippus, who 
about the middle of the second century wrote 
certain ecclesiastical memorials, all of which 
have perished, with the exception of a few 
fragments mostly preserved by Eusebius 
himself. The history or chronicle of Euse- 
bius, coming down to 324 A, D., although im- 
paired in value by the writer's avowed reso- 
lution to record only what would reflect hon- 
our on the church, is rich in material, the ar- 
chives of the empire having been placed at 
his command by Constantine, who held him in 
peculiar esteem." 

Eusebius then was a church historian, 
writing a history of the church from its es- 
tablishment down to the year 324. He was 
familiar with the customs of the church in 
his own life time, and had carefully examined 
the whole past history of Christianity as re- 
flected in the literature of the church. What 
does he say about Sabbath observance among 
Christians? In his Ecclesiastical History, 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 59 

Book 1, chap. 4, in speaking of the patriarchs, 
he says: — 

"They did not care about observing the Sabbaths, 
nor do we. They did not avoid certain kinds of food, 
neither did they regard the other distinctions which 
Moses first delivered to their posterity to be observed 
as symbols; nor do Christians of the present day do 
such things. " 

In Book 3, chap. 27, paragraphs 5 and 6 
he says in speaking of the sect of Ebionites: — 

"The Sabbath and the rest of the discipline of the 
Jews they observed just like them, but at the same 
time, like us, they celebrated the Lord's days as a 
memorial of the resurrection of the Savior. Where- 
fore, in consequence of such a course, they received 
the name Ebionites, which signified the poverty of 
their understanding. For this is the name by which a 
poor man is called among the Hebrews." 

Eusebius uses the terms "Sabbath" and 
"Lord's day" to designate distinct and separ- 
ate days. The "Lord's day" was the memor- 
ial of Jesus' resurrection. Christians ob- 
served the "Lord's day." So far the voice of 
history is decisive, both as to the practice of 
the church, and as to the use of the term 
"Lord's day." It should be remembered 
that Eusebius makes the foregoing state- 
ments with the entire history of the church 
before him. 



60 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

Sect. 14. Our next witness, Peter of 
Alexandria, writing A. D. 306, brings us 
eighteen years nearer the Apostolic age, and 
only two hundred and ten years this side John 
on Patmos. "Peter of Alexandria became 
bishop of that city in 300, and was decapita- 
ted, on the order of Maximinus, without any 
preceding trial, in 311." — Schaff-Herzog Ency 
Let us hear the martyr's testimony. Canon 
15. 

"But the Lord's day we celebrate as a day of joy, 
because on it it he rose again, on which day we have 
received it for a custom not even to bow the knee. 

That the term "Lord's day" meant the 
seventh-day of the week seems never to have 
entered the heads of those who lived near the 
time John wrote. 



Sect. 15. Our next step carries us thir- 
ty-six years nearer the age of inspiration and 
only one hundred and seventy-four years 
from the writing of Rev. 1:10. In the year 
270 Anatolius testifies as follows: — 

"And whom the obligation of the Lord's resurrec- 
tion binds to keep the Paschal festival on the Lord's 
day." Writings of Anatolios, chap. 7. 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 61 

Also in chap. 10 he says : 

And the other party, passing the day of the Lord's 
passion as one replete with sadness and grief, hold 
that it should not be lawful to celebrate the Lord' s 
mystery of the Passover at any other time but on the 
Lord'sday, on which the resurrection of the Lord 
from death took: place, and on which rose also for us 
the cause for everlasting joy." 

The "Lord's day" is here still the day of 
our Saviours resurrection. Anatolius was 
born in Alexandria about 230; died ab3iit 232 
About 264 he visited Caesarea in Palestine, 
and was there ordained a bishop, and after- 
ward settled as bishop of Laodicaea. 

It will be noted by the critical reader that 
our witnesses are taken from all parts of the 
then Christian world, and many of them are 
men who traveled extensively and who were 
therefore personally cognizant of the practice 
of the church universal. Another quotation 
from Anatolius and we pass on. 
, "But if it proves to be the moon's fifteenth or six- 
teenth, or any day up to the twentieth, then our regard 
for the Lord's resurrection, which took place on the 
Lord's day, will lead us to celebrate it on the same 
principles," etc. Writings of Anatolius, chap. 16. 

Sect. 16. The Apostolical Constitutions, 
while not the work of the Apostles, are never- 
theless very ancient. The usual date assign- 



62 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

ed this collection of writings is A, D. 250. Of 
them the Scahff-Herzog Ency. says: — 

"Apostolical Constitutions is the name of a collec- 
tion of ecclesiastical prescripts in eight books, in which 
three independent works have been combined, The 
first six books were probably originally written in 
Greek, in the diocese of Ephesus. They give in the 
loose form of a continuous speech, and in a very diffuse 
style, a multitude of doctrinal, liturgical, and moral in- 
structions. The author is unknown." "The Greek 
original is lost; but a Syrian translation is still extant 
in several manuscripts; and a transcription of the work, 
made in the beginning of the third century, exists in 
Greek, Arab, Ethiopian, and Coptic versions." 

While the author is unknown, yet the book 
no doubt reflects the use of terms, and the 
customs of the church, as these things exist- 
ed at the time of its compilation. It was a 
part of the current church literature of the 
third century. 
We quote from Book 2, Sect. 7, par. 59: — 

"And on the day of our Lord's resurrection, which 
is the Lord's day, meet more diligently, sending praise 
to God that made the universe by Jesus, nnd sent him 
to us and condescended to let him suffer, and raised 
him from the dead." 
Also Book 7, Sect. 2, par. 30:— 

"On the day of the resurrection of the Lord, that 
is, the Lord's day, assemble yourselves together, with- 
ut fail, giving thanks to God, " etc. 

oJ. N. Andrews (Seventh-day Adventist) in his 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 63 

history of the Sabbath, p. 290 also quotes the 
x^postolical Constitutions as follows: — 

"Now we exhort you, brethren and fellow-servants, 
to avoid vain talk and obscene discourses, and jestings, 
drunkenntss, lasciviousness. luxury, unbounded pas- 
sions, with foolish discourses, since we do not permit 
you so much as on the Lord's days, which are days of 
joy. to speak or act anything unseemly" — Book 5, Sect. 
2, par. 10. 

Supposing the date of this witness to be 
250, we are brought to within 154 years of 
John in Rev. 1:10. And still the term "Lord's 
day" always designates the first day of the 
week. When John used that term to what 
day did he refer? In truth, there can be but 
one answer. He undoubtedly intended to des- 
ignate the day that Christian writers, for four 
hundred years thereafter, always designated 
by that term, viz., the day of our Lord's res- 
urrection, the first-day of the week. He used 
the term in its popular well-known significa- 
tion. To say otherwise is to accuse John of 
ignorance or deception. 



Sect. 17. 

•'For because the eighth day, that is, the first day 
after the Sabbath, was to be that on which the Lord 
should rise again, and should quicken us, and give us 
circumcision of the spirit, the eighth day, that is. the 



64 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

first day after the Sabbath, and the Lord's day, went 
before in the figure," etc. 

Thus wrote Cyprian, A. D. 250, in Epistle 58, 
par. 4. 

Like all the other witnesses he makes it 
plain that the "Lord's day" was the day after 
the Sabbath. It will be seen in the foregoing 
that "first day," "eighth day," and "Lord's 
day," are equivalent terms. 

Cyprian was bishop of Carthage and was 
put to death by the Romans for his faith in 
Jesus, in the year 258. 



Sect. 18. Origen was probably born in 
Alexandria about 185 A. D. and died at Caesa- 
rea or Tyre, about 254. The date of the writ- 
ing from which we quote is given as 231 by 
Andrews (Seventh-day Adventist) in his His- 
tory of the Sabbath. As this date is probably 
as early as the case demands we shall not dis- 
pute it. This brings us within 135 years of 
Rev. 1:10. 

In his work against Celsus, Book 8, chap. 
22, Origen says that Christians observed the 
"Lord's day." Hear him: — 

"If it be objected to us on this subject that we our- 
selves are accustomed to certain days, as for example 
the Lord's day, the preparation, the passover, or the 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 65 

pentecost, I have to answer that to the perfect Chris- 
tian, who is ever in his thoughts, words, and deeds, 
serving his natural [Lord, God, the Word, all his days 
are the Lord's, and he is always keeping the Lord's 
day. 

•*He also who is unceasingly preparing himself for 
the true life, and abstaining from the pleasures of this 
life which lead astray so many — who is not indulging 
the lust of the flesh, but 'keeping under his body and 
bringing it into subiection, ' such a one is always keep- 
ing Preparation day. Again, he who considers that 
'Christ our Passover was sacrificed for us,' and that it 
is his duty to keep the feast by eating of the flesh of 
the Word, never ceases to keep the paschal feast; for 
the pascha means a 'passover,' and he is ever striving 
in all his thoughts, words, and deeds, to pass over 
from the things of this life to God, and is hastening to- 
wards the city of God. And, finally, he who can truly 
say, 'We are risen with Christ,' and 'He hath exalted 
us, and made us to sit with Him in heavenly places in 
Christ,' is always living in the season of Pentecost," 

Sabbatarians usually quote only a small 
portion of the foregoing and then represent 
that by drawing unwarranted conclusions. 
For the convenience of debators we have 
given the quotation at length. 

The Ency. Brit, says of Origen:— "Of all 
the theologians of the ancient church, with 
the possible exception of Augustine, Origen 
is the most distinguished and influential." 

Home's Introd. to the Bible, vol. 1, chap. 
2, sect 2, p. 80 says: — "Of all the fathers who 



66 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

flourished in the third century, the most 
learned and laborious unquestionably, was 
Origen." 

He was a great traveler. At one time we 
find him at Rome, at another in Arabia, also 
at Antioch, in Palestine, in Nicomedia, in 
Athens, etc. He was therefore personally ac- 
quainted with the practice of the church in 
all parts of the world. And he says that 
Christians observed the "Lord's day." And 
in the light of former witnesses there can be 
no mistaking the fact that by "Lord's day" 
was meant the first day of the week. 



Sect. 19. We now introduce Tertullian. 
As to his competency as a witness we shall 
let the authorities testify. 

The Schaft'-Herzog Ency. says of him: 
"Born at Carthage about 150 or 160; died 
there between 220 and 240; the first great 
writer of Latin Christianity, and one of the 
grandest and most original characters of the 
ancient church." 

The Ency. Brit, testifies of him:— "The 
earliest and after Augustine the greatest of 
the ancient church writers of the West." 
"Tertullian in fact, created Christian Latin 
literature." 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 67 

M'Clintock & Strong's Ency. says of him: 
— "One of the most noteworthy personages 
belonging to the early church.'' 

Johnson's Ency. declares him to have 
been "The most eminent Latin ecclesiastical 
writer of the early church," 

What does Tertuilian say? Did he know 
anything about a seventh day of the week 
"Lord's day? 1 ' We shall quote from a num.- 
ber of his works. 

1. Tertullian's Apology. Chap. 16. 

"In the same way, if we devote the Sunday to re- 
joicing, from a far different reason than sun-worship, we 
have some resemblance to those of you who devote the 
day of Saturn to ease and luxury, though they too go 
far away from Jewish ways, of which, indeed, they are 
ignorant. ' ' 

The foregoing was written before the 
year 200. 

Schaffs's Hist, of the Christian church, 
vol. 2, p. 833 says: — "The chronological order 
of Tertullian's works can be approximately 
determined." "We divide the works into 
three classes, according to their relation to 
Montanism. 

1. Those books which belong to the 
author's catholic period before A. D. 200; viz: 
Apologeticus * Ad Nationes;" etc. Both the 
Ency. Brit, and the Schaff-Herzog Ency. under 



68 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

the title "Tertullian" assign the Apology to 
the year 197. This was but 101 years from 
John on Patmos. And Sunday was then ob- 
served by Christians. 

2. Tertullian on Idolatry Chap. 14. 

"Oh, better fidelity of the nations to their own 
sect, which claims no solemnity of the Christians for 
itself. Not the Lord's day, not Pentecost, even if they 
had known them, would they have shared with us; for 
they would fear lest they should seem to be Chris- 
tians." **You have a festive day every eighth day." 

The "Lord's day" of the foregoing is no 
doubt the "Sunday" of the preceding quota- 
tion. Earlier in this same 14th chapter, Ter- 
tullian in referring to the Sabbath says: — 

"By us [Christians] to whom Sabbaths are 
strange," etc. 

This precludes the idea of the Sabbath 
being the "Lord's day" mentioned. The 
"Lord's day" and "eighth day" of the quota- 
tion are undoubtedly the same. Elsewhere 
(Sect. 12, 17, 19, 23 and 24) it will be seen that 
"Lord's day," "eighth day" and "first day" all 
pointed out the same day. 

3. Tertullian on Prayer, chap. 2?. 
"We, however, (just as we have received), only on 
the Lord 's day of the resurrection ought to guard not 
only against kneeling, but every posture and office of 
solicitude, deferring even our business, lest we give 
any place to the devil." (As given by J. N. Andrews, 
Hist. Sabbath, p. 223.) 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 69 

This settles it that the "Lord's day" with 
Tertullian was the resurrection day, and on 
this day it also seems that Christian's defer- 
red their ordinary business affairs. 

4. Tertullian Ad Nationes, chap, 13. 
"Others, with greater regard to good manners, it 
must be confessed, suppose that the sun is the God of 
the Christians because it is a well known fact that we 
pray toward the east, or because we make Sunday a day 
of festivity." 

"For the Jewish feasts are the Sabbath and 'the pur- 
ification/ and Jewish also are the ceremonies of the 
lamps, and the feasts of unleavened bread, and the 'lit 
toral prayers,' all which institutions and practices are, 
of course, foreign from your gods. Wherefore, that I 
may return from this digression, you who reproach us 
with the sun and Sunday should consider your proxim 
ity to us. We are not far from your Saturn and your 
days of rest." 

The date of Ad Nationes is fixed by Ency. 
Brit, as being prior to 202-203. The Schaff- 
Herzog Ency. places the time before 200. 

Comment seems almost useless. Tertul- 
lian was a Christian of transcendent ability. 
The statements about Sunday observance 
were concerning a matter of which he knew 
from personal observation. And the condi- 
tion which he describes existed only 100 years 
from the time an Apostle lived. Tertullian 
was born about 150 or 160. John had lived 
only a little more than fifty years before that. 



70 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

Tertullian was a man grown not more than 
eighty years after John's death. He may eas- 
ily have conversed with many who ware 
taught by the pupils of an inspired Apostle. 
It is even possible that he may have been per- 
sonally acquainted with some who were the 
companions of John the Apostle. The custom 
of the church and the meaning of "Lords 
day" were well settled in his time. 

5. For, the use of debaters in exposing a 
shameful perversion by Sabbatarians, of cer- 
tain language of Tertullian, I here insert a 
lengthy quotation from De Corona, another of 
Tertullian' s works. This quotation begins 
about one-third of the way down in sect. 3. 
Previous to the commencement of this quota- 
tion there is not one word relative to Sunday 
observance in the book. 

"Sect. 3:— 

"To deal with this matter briefly, I shall begin 
with baptism. When we are going to enter the water, 
but a little before, in the presence of the congregation 
and under the hand of the president, we solemnly pro- 
fess that we disown the devil, and his pomp, and his 
angels. Hereupon we are thrice immersed, making a 
somewhat ampler pledge than the Lord has appointed 
In the Gospel. Then, when we are taken up [as new- 
born children] , we taste first of all a mixture of milk 
and honey, and from that day we refrain from the daily 
bath for a whole week. We take also, in meetings be- 
fore breakfast, and from the hand of none but the pres- 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 71 

idents, the sacraments of the Eucharist, which the 
Lord both commanded to be eaten at meai-times, and 
enjoined to be taken by all [alike] . As often as the an- 
niversary comes around, we make offerings for the 
dead as birth-day honours. We count fasting or kneel- 
ing in worship on the Lord's day as unlawful. We re- 
joice in the same privilege also from Easter to Whit- 
sunday. We feel pained should any wine or bread, 
even though our own, be cast upon the ground. At 
every forward step and movement, at every going in 
and out, when we put on our clothes and shoes, when 
we bathe, when we sit at the table, when we light the 
lamps, on couch, on seat, in all the ordinary actions of 
daily life, we trace upon the forehead the [sign of the 
cross.]" 

Sect. 4. If, for these and other such rules, you in- 
sist upon having positive Scripture injunction, you 
will find none. Tradition will be held forth to you as 
the originator of them, custom as their strengthened, 
and faith as their observed. That reason will support 
tradition, and custom, and faith, you will either your- 
self perceive, or learn from some one who has." 

It will be noticed that Tertullian does not 
say that there is no scriptural reason for 
Lord's day observance — he does say that for 
the rule concerning "fasting and kneeling" 
etc., on that day there is no scriptural author- 
ity. In this same connection he mentions 
baptism and the Lord's supper. He does not 
mean to deny to them the support of scriptu- 
ral authority. What he does mean to declare 
is, that for immersing three times, etc., there 



72 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

is no scriptural warrant. So, he does not 
mean to deny scriptural warrant for Lord's 
day observance, but only to certain of their 
customs connected with its observance. 

6. One more quotation from Tertullian 
and we must leave him. Tertullian in answer 
to the Jews, chap. 4, gives his idea of the 
Sabbath. 

"It follows, accordingly, that, in so far as the abol- 
iton of carnal circumcision and of the old law is demon- 
strated as having been consummated at its specific 
times, so also the observance of the Sabbath is demon- 
strated to have been temporary." 

Much more might easily be given from 
Tertullian, but we must hasten on toward the 
fountain head of truth in its simplicity and 
purity — the age Apostolic. 



Sect. 20. We next quote briefly from the 
writings of Clement of Alexandria. The 
Schaff-Herzog Ency. says of him: — "One of 
the most celebrated teachers of the church of 
Alexandria. The date of his birth falls near 
the middle of the second century." 

And the date of the Miscellanies from 
which we quote is 194, only 98 years this side 
John on Patmos. It is possible that Clement 
may have known some aged persons, who in 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 73 

their j^outh were associates of John the Apos- 
tle. 

Book 7, chap. 12. 

''The same holds of pleasure. For it is the highest 
achievement for one who has had trial of it, afterward 
to abstain. For what great thing is it, if a man re- 
strains himself in what he knows not? He [the Gnos- 
tic] in fulfillment of the precept, according to the gos- 
pel, keeps the Lord's day, when he abandons an evil 
disposition, and assums that of the Gnostic, glorifying 
the Lord's resurrection in himself." 

It is claimed that Clement here and else- 
where used the term "Lord's day" in a mys- 
tical sense and not as referring* to a specific 
day of the week. Be that as it may it is evi- 
dent that Clement here bases his language 
upon the fact of a "Lord's day" that was 
somehow associated with the , "Lord's resur- 
rection." If he makes a literal application of 
the term "Lord's day" he no doubt uses it as 
does the long line of authorities already quot- 
ed. If it is a figurative use of the term that 
he intends, then it is evident that the figure 
is based upon some literal "Lord's day" that 
had associated with it especially the thought 
of the "Lord's resurrection." This shows 
that the literal "Lord's day" was the day on 
which Jesus arose, the first day of the week. 



74 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

Sect. 21. Our next witness is Bardesanes, 
and the date A. D. 180, fourteen years nearer 
than Clement to John the Apostle and only 
eighty-four years from Rev. 1:10. In the 
Book of the Laws of Countries, Bardesanes 
says: — 

'On one day, the first of the week, we assemble 
ourselves together. " 

Bardesanes was a Gnostic. Of him the 
International Ency. under the title "Gnos 
tics," says: — "Founders of special schools 
were, in Syria, Saturninus of Antioch, about 
125 A. D. under Hadrian; Bardesanes of Edes- 
sa, 161 A. D., the author of many hymns," 
etc. It will be seen from the foregoing that 
Gnosticism flourished early in the second cen- 
tury, and that in 161, nineteen years before 
the date to which we assign the testimony of 
Bardesanes, he was already the founder of a 
school in Syria. He speaks of the custom of 
the sect to which he belonged. It is true, he 
was a so-called heretic, but his testimony is 
valuable, because it brings out the great fact, 
that all classes, orthodox and heterodox, no 
matter how far apart they were upon other 
points, all united in the observance of the 
first-day of the week as the day of public as- 
sembly and worship. 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 75 

Sect. 22. We shall next hear from Diony- 
sius, who became bishop of Corinth in the 
year 170. The Schaif-Herzog Ency. tells us 
that he "wrote eight letters * which enjoyed 
a great reputation in their time." These let- 
ters were lost, but fragments of them have 
been preserved to us by Eusebius in his Eccl. 
Hist., already referred to in Sect. 13. The 
date of the statement from Dionysius is 170 
A. D. and his words as given by Eusebius in 
his History, Book 4, Chap. 23, are as follows: 

"To-day we have passed the Lord's holy day, in 
which we have read your epistle." 

The above is quoted by Eusebius from an 
epistle written by Dionysius to the Romans, 
and the immediate reference of the sentence 
quoted to an epistle written by Clement, bish- 
ip of Rome, to the Corinthians. When Diony- 
sius wrote, the Lord's day was already a 
"holy" day among Christians. It would be 
presumptious to seriously question the import 
of the term "Lord's day" as used by Diony- 
sius. In all the hundreds of years of history 
through which we have journeyed we have 
not found a single writer applying the term 
"Lord's day" to the seventh day of the week. 
By "Lord's day" they all refer to the first- 
day of the week. Dionysius uses the term 
in its well understood sense at the time he 



76 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

lived. He does not stop to define the term. 
Everybody then knew that the "Lord's day" 
was the first day of the week, just as every 
well informed person now knows that from 
Sozomen (440) to Pentecost (31) there is not a 
single instance in which it can be proven that 
"Lord's day" meant the seventh-day of the 
week. And Dionysius wrote only seventy- 
four years this side John on Patmos. 



Sect. 23. We next introduce Justin Mar- 
tyr. His first Apology, from which we quote 
was given to the world as early as A. D. 140. 
The reader should constantly bear in mind 
that this witness testifies only forty-four 
years this side the writing of the Book of 
Revelation. The First Apology was ad- 
dressed to the Emperor Antonius Pius and 
his adopted sons. It is common for Sabbatar- 
ians to make vicious attacks upon the early 
"Fathers" of the church. They are charged 
with being ignorant, dishonest and unrelia- 
ble. It is insinuated that these writings, 
from which first-day observers quote to prove 
the ancient and universal observance of the 
first-day of the week as the "Lord's day" are 
spurious, etc,, etc. We shall therefore pre- 
face the testimony of Justin with evidence 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 77 

from the very highest sources concerning the 
geuineness of the writings from which we 
quote, and also as to competency and ability 
of our witness. We shall call several author- 
ities concerning Justin. 

(1.) Schaff's Hist. Christian church. Vol. 
2, p. 712. "The most eminent among the 
Greek Apologists of the second century is 
Flavius Justinus, surnamed 'Philospher and 
Martyr.' He is the typical apologist, who de- 
voted his whole life to the defense of Chris- 
tianity at a time when it was most assailed, 
and he sealed his testimony with his blood." 
P. 714. ' 'He was an itinerant evangelist 
or teaching missionary, with no fixed abode 
and no regular office in the church." 

P. 716. "His chief works are apologetic, 
and still remain, namely, his two Apologies 
against the heathen, and his Dialogue With 
the Jew Trypho^ 

P. 719. "The genuine works of Justin 
are of unusual importance and interest. 
They bring vividly before us the time when 
the church was still a small sect, despised 
and persecuted, but bold in faith and joyful in 
death. They everywhere attest his honesty 
and earnestness, his enthusiastic love for 
Christianity, and his fearlessness in its de- 
fense against all assaults from without and 



78 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

perversions from within. He gives us the 
first reliable account of the public worship 
and the celebration of the sacraments." 

(2.) Diet, of Christian Antiquities, by 
Smith and Wace. Article, "Justin Martyr." 
"It is this freedom of apologetic which 
crowned itself toward the close of Justin's 
life in the three works of his which alone can 
be accepted as undoubtedly authentic: the 
two Apologies and the Dialogue With Trypho 
the Jew." "The genuineness of the three 
writings already mentioned is universally ac- 
cepted." 

(3.) M'Clintock & Strong's Ency. "Jus- 
tin, sur named the Philosopher, or more gener- 
ally the Martyr, of whom Eusebius says that 
he overshadowed all the great men who illum- 
inated the second century by the splendor of 
his name, was born toward the close of the 
Apostolic age, that is the beginning of the 
second century." Under the head of "Undis- 
puted Works" of Justin M'Clintock & Strong 
cite, the First Apology, the Second Apology, 
and the Dialogue with Trypho. 

(4,)The Ency. Brit. "Justine was one of 
the earliest and ablest of Christian Apolo- 
gists." "He was probably born near the be- 
ginning of the second century, and was mar- 
tyred somewhere between 148 and 165." In 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 79 

speaking of his writings, the Britannica fur- 
ther says: — "The First Apology is undoubt- 
edly genuine * * and was probably written 
138-140 A. D." 

(5.) The International Eucy. Article. 
"Justinus." "After Tertullian, the most dis- 
tinguished apologist of the Christian church 
was a native of Fiavia Neapolis, a Roman city 
erected on the site of the ancient Sechem, in 
Samaria." "The books ascribed to him with 
certainty are two Apologies for the Christians, 
the first addressed 'to Antoninus Pius,' the 
second 'to the senate;' a Dialogue with Try- 
phon the Jew, which professes to be the re- 
cord of an actual discussion heldatEphesus." 

We apprehend that Justin needs no furth- 
er commendation. If his statement as to a 
matter of fact, upon a subject with which he 
was thoroughly familiar, is not reliable, where 
shall we go to fiad reliability? Echo answers, 
Where? Three works which come to us, are, 
as proven by the foregoing authorities, un- 
doubtedly from the pen of Justin, viz., the 
First and Second Apologies, and the Dialogue 
with Trypho. 

Here are Justine, s words as found in the 
First Apology, Chap. 57:— 

"And on the day called Sunday, all who live in 
cities or in the country, gather together to one place. 



80 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the 
prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when 
the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs 
and exhorts to the imitation of these good things. 
Then we all rise together and pray, and as we before 
said, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and 
water are brought, and the president in like manner 
offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his 
ability, and the people assent, say Amen; and there is 
a distribution to each and a participation of that over 
which thanks has been given, and to those who are ab- 
sent a portion is sent by the deacons. And they who 
are well to do and willing give what each thinks fit; 
and what is collected is deposited with the president, 
who succours the orphans and widows, and those who 
through sickness or any other cause, are in want, and 
those who are in bonds, and the strangers sojourning 
among us, and in a word takes care of all who are in 
need. But Sunday is the day on which we all hold our 
common assembly, because it is the first day on which 
God, having wrought a change in the darkness and 
matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ our Saviour 
on the same day rose from the dead. For He was cru- 
cified on the day before that of Saturn (Saturday); and 
on the day after that of Saturn, which is the day of the 
Sun, having appeared to His Apostles and disciples, 
He taught them these things, which we have submitted 
to you also for your consideration." 

It is objected that Justin does not use the 
term "Lord's day." What of it? That does 
not change the fact which he states. More- 
over his Apology was addressed to a heathen 
Emperor, and "Sunday" was no doubt the us- 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 81 

ual name of the day with him, and hence, Jus- 
tin so designates it. In our intercourse with 
worldly men, we also usually designate the 
day by that name. Only forty-four years 
from the vision of John upon Patmos we find 
the whole Christian church observing Sunday 
as its day of public worship. 

This universal and undisputed practice 
did not spring up in a day. It must have had 
its origin -many decades back — but less than 
half a century brings us to the time when an 
apostle was still living. This testimony alone 
is decisive as to the "Lord's day" of the 
church in the time of John the Revelator. 

Justin was born about the time John the 
Apostle died. He may, indeed, have been 
among the living before John took his depart 
ure. And he was born in Shechem, the very 
center of Palestine itself, and was an "itine- 
rant evangelist" with "no fixed abode." At 
one time he was in Rome, at another in Asia 
Minor, at another in Ephesus, a "teaching 
missionary," defending the faith against all 
assaults. He was personally cognizant of the 
customs of the church in all parts of the 
world, and in his Apology he was defending 
the whole Christian church, and setting forth 
the doctrine and practice, not of one congre 



82 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

gation alone, but of Christians generally. He 
no doubt associated with many who had been 
the companions of an inspired Apostle, and 
from them gathered much of that inspiration 
which made him invincible in life and fearless 
in death. And somewhere the dust of the old 
martyr hero now reposes awaiting the dawn 
of that day when the voice of his Master shall 
give back to him the life which he did not 
count dear, but voluntarily yielded up for the 
truth's sake. His life and works are the her- 
itage of all saints, and it does not lie in the 
mouths of the followers of the false prophet- 
ess, Ellen White, to assault his good name. 

No doubt many of our readers would like 
to know what Justin has to say about the Sab- 
bath. Very well, to make long story short we 
shall hear the "defender of the faith" upon 
that matter also. We quote from the Dia- 
logue with Trypho, Chap. 10: 

"And when they ceased, I again addressed them 
thus: 'Is there any other matter, my friends, in which 
we are blamed, than this, that we live not after the law 
and are not circumcised in the flesh as your fathers 
were, and do not observe Sabbaths as you do?' ' ; 

Trpho was a Jew, and the foregoing shows 
that it was not the general habit of Christians 
to observe either circumcision or the Sabbath. 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 83 

Once more, chap. 18: 

"For we too would observe the fleshly circumcis- 
ion, and the Sabbaths, and in short all the feasts, if we 
did not know for what reason they were enjoined you, — 
namely, on account of your transgressions and the 
hardness of your hearts." 

Justin is strong medicine on the Sabbath 
question. Christians generally did not ob- 
serve the Sabbath in his time. Nodoubtthey 
did observe the "Lord's day" — hence the Sab- 
bath was not that day. With Justin's testi- 
mony we could well close the case and sub- 
mit the issues to any intelligent and unbiased 
jury, but still there's more to follow. Can- 
right in his Seventh day Adventism Renounc- 
ed, p 200, quotes Justin as follows: 

"The first day after the Sabbath, remaining the 
first of all days, is called however, the eighth, accord- 
ing to the number of all the days of the cycle, and [yet] 
remains the first. " — Dialogue with Trypho, Chap. 41. 

This is given to show that Justin calls 
Sunday the eighth day. 

The fact that Justin speaks of water having 
been brought with the wine and bread may be 
puzzling to some. The following fromKitto's 
Cy. of Biblical Literature, Article, Sapper of 
the Lord, will perhaps clear that matter up: 

"The custom, which prevailed during the first sev- 
en centuries, of mixing the wine with water, and in the 



84 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

Greek Church with hot water, appears to have originat- 
ed with the ancient Jews, who mingled their thick boil- 
ed wine with water." 



Sect. 24. Our next quotation will be 
from the Epistle of Barnabas. The writer of 
this Epistle is well known. It is, however, 
very ancient. By early Christian writers, it 
was supposed to have been written by Barna- 
bas, the companion of Paul, and was ranked 
by some among the scriptures themselves. 

The Ency. Brit, under the title, "Apos- 
tolic Fathers" has this to say: — "There has 
come down to us a work called the Epistle of 
Barnabas. This work is unanimously as- 
cribed to Barnabas the companion of St. Paul, 
by early Christian writers." u The great ma- 
jority of writers assign it to the reign of Ha- 
drian sometime between 119 and 126 A. D." 

The Schaff-Herzog Ency. says: — "The 
epistle was probably written in Alexandria, 
at the beginning of the second century, and 
by a Gentile Christian," 

Philip Schaff" in the Teaching of the 
Twelve Apostles, p. 121 in speaking of the 
Didache says: — "It is older than the Epistle 
Barnabas, which was certainly written before 
120, probably before 100." 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 85 

We will not claim that the Apostle Bar- 
nabas is the author nor that the Epistle is in- 
spired — but that it was written very early in 
the second century, not later than A. D. 120 
seems certain. And the fact that it was so 
highly esteemed in the early church is con- 
clusive proof that its statements upon mat- 
ters of fact concerning church practice must 
have been correct. 

Here is what the Epistle says. Chap. 15: 

"Further he says to them, 'Your new moons and 
your Sabbaths I cannot endure.' Ye perceive how he 
speaks; your present Sabbaths are not acceptable to 
me, but that is which I have made [namely this], when 
giving rest to all things, I shall make a beginning of 
the eighth day, that is, a beginning of another world. 
'Wherefore, also, we keep the eighth day withjoyfulness 
the day also on which Jesus rose again from the dead. 
And when he had manifested himself, he ascended into 
the heavens," 

Elsewhere we have noted the fact that 
the first day of the week is also called "eighth 
day" (Sect. 74) and the writer of this Epis- 
tle expressly declared the "eighth day" to be 
the day on which Jesus "rose again from the 
dead," and this was the day that Christians 
observed at the date of the writing of this 
Epistle. If the Epistle had said that Chris- 
tians kept the day of Christ's resurrection, 
and that statement had been false, certainly 



86 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

no one would have been so foolish as to ima- 
gine that the Epistle was from the pen of the 
Apostle Barnabas. Let the reader keep in 
mind that the foregoing quotation relates to 
facts as they existed about the year 120 — this 
was but twenty-four years this side Rev. 1:10 
And Schaff — than whom we have none more 
reliable — thinks the Epistle was written be- 
fore A. D. "*00. It may have been written 
while the Apostle John was yet living, and at 
fartherst is only a few years this side the 
Apostolic age. The writer may have been ac- 
quainted with some of the Apostles — so far as 
the time is concerned, and certainly he must 
have known many who were the associates of 
inspired men. Our readers may be curious 
to know what is said of the Sabbath in this 
ancient document. 

We quote from chap. 2: — 

u For he Lath revealed to us by all the prophets 
that he needs neither sacrifices, nor burnt offerings, 
nor oblations, saying thus, 'vVhat is the multitude of 
your sacrifices unto me, saith the Lord? I am full of 
burnt offerings, and desire not the fat of lambs, and 
the blood of bulls and goats, not when ye come to ap- 
pear before me; for who hath required these things at 
your hands? Tread no more my courts, not though ye 
bring with you fine flour. Incense is a vain abomina- 
tion unto me, and your new moons and Sabbaths I can- 
not endure.' He has therefore abolished these things, 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 87 

that the new law of our Lord Jesus Christ, which is 
without the yoke of necessity, might have a human ob- 
lation." 

The writer here contends for the aboli- 
tion of the Sabbath. As this is a statement 
of the writer's opinion we make no comment 
— it is merely given as a matter of informa- 
tion. It is certain that when this Epistle was 
written, the church was keeping with joyf ul- 
ness the day of our Lord's resurrection. The 
Sabbath was held to have been abolished. 
The "Lord's day" of the church at this per- 
iod, must then have been the first-day of the 
week. 



Sect. 25. There has been preserved a 
letter written -by Pliny, Roman Governor of 
Bythinia, to the Emperor, Trojan. Its date 
is A. D. 104. We quote as given by Andrew's 
Hist, of the Sabbath, p. 237. This letter was 
concerning the Christians in his province, 

"They affirmed that the whole of their guilt or er- 
ror was, that they met on a certain day before it was 
light, and addressed themselves in a form of prayer to 
Christ, as to some god, binding themselves by a solemn 
oath, not for the purpose of any wicked design, but 
never to commit any fraud,, theft, or adultery; never 
to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they 
should be called upon to. deliver itjip; after which it 



bb THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

was their custom to separate, and then re-assemble to 
eat in common a harmless meal. " 

This letter does not designate the day, 
but it shows that Christians met on a "cer- 
tain stated day" in the year 104. In the 
light of the history we have already adduced 
it is a thing beyond all doubt that that 
"stated day" was each first-day of the week. 
After quoting this passage from Pliny, Fish- 
er in "The Beginnings of Christianity," p. 
563 says: — 

"The 'stated day' on which the Christians assem- 
bled for worship, it is scarcely possible to doubt was 
Sunday." 

Section 26. We next introduce the teach 
ing of the Twelve Apostles. This perhaps 
antedates all other post- Apostolic literature. 
The writer is. unknown. Concerning this re- 
markable document we quote from SchafTs 
"Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, '* third ed- 
ition, 1890, p. 125. 

"The author modestly concealed his name and gives 
no clue to his identification. Bat he was certainly 
a Jewish Christian, and probably a companion and pu- 
pil of the Apostles." p. 123. "The majority of schol. 
ars assign the Didache to Alexandria in Egypt, a 
minority to Palestine or Syria." 

The term "Didache" signifies "a teach- 
ing" and is specifically applied to the treatise 
now under condsideration. 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 89 

P. 114. "The Didache is no modern or ancient 
forgery, but has every internal evidence of very great 
antiquity and genuineness." 

" 'No one,' says Bishop Lightfoot, 'could or would 
have forged it.' " 

P. 122. "We may therefore assign the Didache 
with some confidence to the closing years of the first 
century, sav between A. D. 90 and 100." 

Prof. Adolph Harnack, in an article at 
the end of Vol. 1. of the Schaff-Herzog Ency. 
says: — "All these considerations show that 
the writing cannot be set earlier than A. D. 
120 with certainty, or earlier than A. D. 100 
with any probability, but that the probable 
limits are A. D. 120 and 165, and in this space 
the earlier dates are in most cases freer from 
difficulty than the later." 

Even Harnack admits that the earlier- 
dates are the more probable ones. This docu- 
ment, then, may have been written while an 
Apostle was still living. If not written while 
one was actually living-, j T et the author, no 
doubt, lived contemporary with John, and 
knew many who had been the associates of in- 
spired men. We are now ready for the quota- 
tion. Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, Chap. 

14, Par. 1. 

"And on the Lord's day of the Lord, come together 
and break bread, and Hive thanks, having before con- 
fessed your transgressions, that your sacrifice may be 
pure." 



90 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

"Oh," says the objector, "it does not say 
that the first day of the week is the Lord's 
day." It was not necessary to be so specific 
as that. The term "Lord's day," as we have 
found, never was specifically applied to any 
other day. It was always used to designate 
the first day of the week by other writers. 
Justin and the Epistle of Barnabas place it 
beyond all doubt that the first-day of the 
week was generally observed during" the first 
half of the second century. That the writer 
of the Didache intended to designate the usual 
day of public worship does not admit of doubt. 
That the first-day of the week was that day is 
equally certain. Hence, by the term "Lord's 
day" the Didache certainly refers to the first- 
day of the week. There can be no reasonable 
doubt that the first-day of the week was, at 
the date of the writing of the Didache, gener- 
ally known among the Christians by the name 
"Lord's day." And beyond all controversy 
John in Rev. 1:10 used the term with its usual 
signification. We have reached the apostolic 
age. 

Sect. 27. John on the Island of Patmos, 
A. D. 96 said: — "1 was in the Spirit on the 
Lord's day."— Rev. 1:10. 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 91 

Sect. 28. Luke, in A. D. 63, speaking of 
an occurence at Troas, some years in the past 
said: — "And on the first day of the week when 
we were gathered together to break bread, 
Paul discoursed with them, intending to de- 
part on the morrow; and prolonged his speech 
until midnight."— Acts 20:7. 

The testimony of the writers of the 
church in the age immediately succeeding the 
New Testament is decidedly against Seventh- 
day-Adventism. Adventists realize the fact. 
Hence they seek in every concievable way to 
break down the testimony of these witnesses, 
No way is too dark or devious for them to re- 
sort to if there seems a probability that it 
will lessen the weight of this fatal testimony. 
One of the most common resorts is an appeal 
to the anti-Catholic prejudice of Protestants. 
Sabbatarians know that if they can fix in the 
public mind the notion that these "Fathers" 
were Catholics, the weight of their testimony 
will be much ]essened. 

W. B. Hill, in Discussion Notes, p. 31, 
gives a fair example of their argument on the 
point: — 

''The affirmative opened his argument by claiming 
that the Lord's day of Rev. 1:10 was the first day of the 
week, relying mainly upon the Fathers of the Catholic 
church for proof." 

■« 



92 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

The ''Fathers" here alluded to are such 
men as Justin Martyr, the writer of the Epis- 
tle of Barnabas, Tertullian, Origen, etc. It 
is not necessary to run over the whole list. 
As a matter of fact these men were not mem- 
bers of the Catholic church. Elsewhere 
(Sect. 78) we have quoted Uriah Smith, Ad- 
ventist, to the effect that the papacy was es- 
tablished in A. D. 538. It is true that the 
power of the Roman bishop did not spring up 
in a day, and equally true that the papacy, 
popularly styled the "Catholic church," was 
not established until after the year 500. 
Smith says 538. 

Johnson in his Vision of the Ages, p, 220 

places the date at 533. He says: — 

l, In A. D. 533 the 'Man of Sin' was certainly fully 
revealed." 

And yet Adventists hold up as "Catho- 
lics" men who lived two, three and four hun- 
dred years before the establishment of the 
papacy — and all for the purpose of covering 
up the evident facts of history. Such men as 
Tertullian and Justin Martyr never saw the 
Catholic church. It had no existence at the 
time they lived. Such misrepresentations 
and willful falsifying reminds one of Weyler's 
type-written Spanish victories in Cuba. 



Chapter IIL 



THE VOICE OF HISTOKY. 

Sect. 29. In this chapter we shall give 
a number of quotations from standard church 
historians on the issue at bar. Sabbatarians 
are famous quoters of history, especially 
when permitted to parade some relic of antiq- 
uity, which all up-to-date scholars repudiate 
as an authority, before an audience, 99-100ths 
of which never have read a church history, nor 
had access to a modern Encyclopedia. But in 
public debate, when called upon to face the 
cold facts, as they are found stated by unsym- 
pathetic, but just historians, whose scholar- 
ship and integrity is conceded by all who are 
at all versed in current literature, the Sabba- 
tarian waxeth eloquent in his denunciation of 
"human," "man-made" authorities. Nothing 



94 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

but "the Bible alone" will do him then, and in 
such supreme moments he even forgets the 
inspiration of ELlen White. Let us hear the 
voice of unprejudiced history. 



Sect. 30. "History of the Christian 
Church," by Schaff, Vol. 1, pp, 478-479: 

''Hence, the first-day was already in the apostolic 
age honorably designatedas 'the Lord's day.' On that 
day Paul met with the disciples at Troas and preached 
till midnight. On that day he ordered the Galatian and 
Corinthian Christians to make, no doubt in connection 
with divine service, their weekly contributions to 
charitable objects according to their ability. It appears, 
therefore, from the New Testament itself, that Sunday 
was observed as a day of worship, and in special com- 
memoration of the Resurrection, whereby the work of 
redemption was finished. The universal and uncon- 
tradicted Sunday observance in the second century 
can only be explained by the fact that it had its roots 
in apostolic practice. Such observance is the more to 
be appreciated as it had no support in civil legislation 
before the age of Consxantine, and must have been con- 
nected with many inconveniences, considering the low- 
ly social condition of the majority of Christians and 
their dependence upon their heathen masters and em- 
ployers." 

P. 479. "Besides the Christian Sunday, the Jew- 
ish Christians observed their ancient Sabbath also, till 
Jerusalem was destroyed After that event, the Jew- 
ish habit continued only among the Ebionites and Naz- 
arenes." 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 95 

Sect. 31. "The Beginnings of Christian- 
ity," by Geo. P. Fisher, Professor Eccl. Hist, 
in Yale College. In Chap. 17, pp. 561-562, 
concerning "Christianity in the First Cen- 
tury" we read: — 

"Among Jewish Christians, the observance of the 
weekly sabbath, and of the annual festivals which were 
appointed in the Mosaic Law, of course continued. 
Where the community was predominantly made up of 
Jews, the old observances might remain. But the 
Apostle Paul resisted the introduction of the Old Tes- 
tament festivals, including the Sabbath, into the 
churches which he had planted; declaring that by the 
adoption of them the Gentile believer forfeited the bene- 
fits of the Gospel, since he chose to rest his salvation 
upon rites, instead of upon Christ. (See Col. 2:16, 
where the annual, monthly, and weekly festivals 
of the Jews are specified. — Ed.) There is to be 
found in the New Testament no explicit appointment of 
the first day of the week as a day of Christian worship. 
Much less is there, either in* the New Testament or in 
the ecclesiastical writers of the first centuries, any 
statement to the effect that the Christian institution was 
the Old Testament Sabbath enjoined in the decalogue, 
the first day being substituted for the seventh. Never- 
theless, there are traces of the special religious com- 
memoration of Sunday, the day of the Saviour's resur- 
rection, in several passages of the New Testament. It 
is called the Lord's day, in the book of Revelation. It 
is an observance that sprang up under the eye of the 
Apostles, and with their approval; at the same time it 
was a spontaneous product of Christian feeling. On 
that day the early Christians joined in acts of joyful 



96 THIRTEEN CHAPTEKS ON 

worship, and set apart their gifts for the poor. In 
churches composed of Jewish Christians, this conse- 
cration of the first-day was associated with the contin- 
ued observance of the Sabbath; which could not have 
been the case had there been a substitution, by an ex- 
plicit ordinance, of the first- day for the seventh." 



Sect 32. "Church of the First Three 
Centuries,'' by Aloan Lamson, p. 322: 

"But, before proceeding to speak of the annual 
festivals, we must say a few words of the weekly festi- 
val of the primitive Christians, more especially as it 
was intimately connected with the oldest of the yearly 
festivals. This was the festi\al ol Sunday — the ear- 
liest of the Christian days of rejoicing. It would seem 
that the disciples, from the first or during the apostolic 
times, were accustemed to meet for thanks and praise 
on the first-day of the week. Certainly the oldest re- 
cords in existence, after those of the New Testament, 
refer to this as a well known and established custom. 
The first-day of the week was universally distinguished 
from uther days; and it was observed as a day of joy, a 
festival day, on account of the Lord's resurrection on 
that day, of which it was a standing monument: hence 
called the Lord's day. That it was uniformly observed 
as a day of rejoicing, there is no dispute: on this point 
all the old writers bear consenting testimony. We do 
not mean that it was a day devoted to sensuous pleas- 
ures. It was not; and King James' 'Book of Sports 
would have been as offensive to the early Christians as 
it was to the Puritans. " 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 97 

P. 323. '-They would not call it the 'Sabbath' 
even. They never so call it, but either the Lord's day, 
or else, in conformity with Roman usage, the day of the 
sun (Sunday) generally the latter, when addressing 
the Gentiles; and by one or the other of these designa- 
tions was the day known, and not as the Sabbath, till 
so recently as the end of the sixteenth century." 

"The old Christian writers, whenever they use 
the term 'Sabbath' uniformly mean Saturday." 

Pp. 323-324. "The custom of fasting on Saturdays 
first prevailed in the Western church; though as late 
as the time of Augustinp (the end of the fourth century) 
this custom was not uniform; some observing the day 
as a fast and others as a festival. But, in regard to 
Sunday, there was no difference of opinion or usage 
among the early Christians. The day was uniformly 
observed with cheerfulness, yet always in a religious 
way, as Clement of Alexandria expresses it, by 'ban- 
ishing all evil thoughts and entertaining all good ones, 
and by meeting for thanks and worship. It was called 
the 'chief — as it were, the queen — of days.' " 



Sect. 33. "History of the Christian 
Church," compiled from the works of Dr. G. 
Gregory, by Martin Ruter, D. D. In chap. 
3, p. 27, in the history of the church in the 
first century we read: — 

"The first Christian Church established at Jerusa- 
lem by apostolical authority became in its doctrine and 
practice a model for the greater part of those which 
were founded in the first century. It may easily be 



98 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

conceived that these churches were not superb edifices, 
purposely erected for the celebration of divine worship. 
Assembling at first in small numbers, the places where 
the primitive Christians met for pious purposes, were 
doubtless sequestered retirements, or the houses of 
private individuals, which, from various reasons, and 
by various means, would in time become the property 
of the community, and be gradually extended and im- 
proved. Select portions of scripture were publicly 
read in these assemblies, which were succeeded by a 
brief and serious exhortation to the people. The 
preacher usually delivered his sermons sitting, while 
the people stood: which was, probably, in conformity to 
the practice of the synagogue. The prayers formed a 
considerable part of public worship. To this succeed- 
ed the oblations, and the distribution of the Lord's Sup- 
per, " etc. 

"Beside the appointment of the first- day of the 
week, by the apostles, for the public celebration of re- 
ligious worship, the early Christians are believed to 
have observed two anniversary festivals," etc. 



Sect. 34. ''A Study of Primitive Chris- 
tianity," by Janes, p. 211:— 

"The custom of meeting on the 'Lord's day,' or 
first-day of the week, for religious services and social 
converse, is of early origin, datiug from the apostolic 
period. At this time, however, the day had acquired 
none of the peculiar sanctity attaching to the Jewish 
Sabbath, and was never, as in later times, confounded 
with it. The seventh-day was still observed, accord- 
ing to the mandates of the law, by the Jewish Chris- 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 99 

tians. The earliest Christian writers outside the limi- 
ted circle of the Nazarenes, who compare the two days T 
regard the Lord's day, not as a continuance of the Sab- 
bath, but as an institution of an essentially different 
character. " 



Sect. 35. "Mosheim's Ecclesiastical His- 
tory. '' Of Christianity in the first century 
we read, Book 1, Part 2, chap. 4, par. 4: — 

''Since then there was such a variety in the ritual 
and discipline of the primitive churches, it must be 
very difficult to give such an account of the worship, 
manners, and institutions of the ancient Christians, as 
will agree with what was practiced in all those coun- 
tries where the gospel flourished. There are notwith- 
standing, certain laws, whose authority and obligations 
were universal and indispensable among Christians; 
and of these we shall here give a brief account. AH 
Christians were unanimous in setting apart the first 
day of the week, on which the triumphant Saviour arose 
from the dead, for the solemn celebration of public 
worship. This pious custom, which was derived from 
the example of the church of Jerusalem, was founded 
upon the express appointment of the apostles, who con- 
secrated that day to the same sacred purpose, and was 
observed universally througout the Christian churches, 
as appears from the united testimoniesof the most cred- 
ible writers. The seventh-day of the week was also ob- 
served as a festival, not by the Christians in general 
but by such churches only as were principally com- 
posed of Jewish converts; nor did the other Christians 
censure this custom as criminal or unlawful. " 



100 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

In his history of Christianity in the sec- 
ond century, Mosheim says — Book 1, Part 2, 
chap. 4, par. 8: — 

"The first Christians assembled for the purpose of 
divine worship, in private houses, in caves, and in 
vaults, where the dead were buried. Their meetings 
were on the first-day of the week; and, in some places, 
they assembled also on the seventh, which was 
celebrated by the Jews." 

Par. 12. "In these times [the second century] , the 
sacrament of the Lord's supper was celebrated, for the 
most part, on Sundays, and the ceremonies observed 
upon that occasion were such as follow. Of the bread 
and wine, which were presented among the other obla- 
tions of the faithful, a part was separated from the rest, 
and consecrated by the prayers of the bishop. The 
wine was mixed with water, and the bread was divid- 
ed into several portions. A part of the consecrated 
bread and wine was carried to the sick or absent mem- 
bers of the church, as a testimony of fraternal love, 
sent to them by the whole society. ' ' 

In the history of Christianity in the third 
century the same author tells us, Book 1, 
Part 2, chap. 4, par. 2. :— 

•'In most of the provinces there were, at this time, 
some fixed places set apart for public worship among 
the Christians as will appear evident to every impar- 
tial inquirer into these matters." 

"With respect to the form of divine worship, and 
the times appointed for its celebration, there were few 
innovations made in this century. Two things, how- 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 101 

ever, deserve to be noticed here: the first is, that the 
discourses, or sermons, addressed to the people, were 
very different from those of the earlier times of the 
church," etc. 

"The second thing that we professed to mention as 
worthy of notice, is, that about this time, the use of in- 
cense w r as introduced, at least into many churches." 

Par. 3. "'Several alterations were now introduced 
in the celebration of the Lord's supper, by those who 
had the direction of divine worship. The prayers, 
used upon this occasion were lengthened, "etc. 

''As to the time of celebrating this solemn ordi- 
nance, it must be carefully observed, that there was a 
considerable variation in different churches, arising 
from their different circumstances, and founded upon 
reasons of prudence and necessity. In some, it was 
celebrated in the morning; in others, at noon; and in 
others, in the evening." 

In his history of the fourth century Mas 
heim tells us, Book 2, Part 2, chap. 4, Par. 5: — 

"The first day of the week, which was the ordinary 
and stated time for the public assemblies of Christians, 
was, in consequence of a peculiar law enacted by Con- 
stantine, observed with greater solemnity than it had 
formerly been." 

Sect. 35. (a) Neander's "History of the 
Christian Religion and Church." Vol. I pp. 
295-296. Translated from the German by Jos- 
eph Torrey: — 

"The first intimation of this change is in Acts 20:7, 
where we find the church assembled on the first-day of 



102 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

the week; a still later one is in Rev. 1:10, where by 
the 'Lord's day' can hardly be understood the day of 
judgment." "As the Sabbath was regarded as repre- 
senting Judaism, Sunday was contemplated as a sym- 
bol of the new life consecrated to the risen Christ and 
grounded in his resurrection. Sunday was distin- 
guished as a day of joy, by being exempted from fasts, 
and by the circumstance that prayer was performed on 
this day in a standing and not in a kneeling posture, as 
Christ, by his resurrection, had raised up fallen man 
again to heaven. But as we have already observed in 
Tertullian a confounding of the Jewish with the Chris- 
tian view of feasts, so we find also in him indications of 
the transfer of the law of the Jewish Sabbath to Sun- 
day; for by him, attending to any business on Sunday 
seems to have been regarded as sinful. ' ' 

"Those churches, however, which were composed 
of Jewish Christians, though they admitted, with the 
rest, the festival of Sunday, yet retained also tnat of 
the Sabbath," 

P. 332. "As we have already remarked, the cele- 
bration of the Lord's supper was still held to consti- 
tute an essential part of divine worship on every Sun- 
day, as appears from Justin Martyr," 

Andrews' History of the Sabbath, p. 231, 
gives the following alleged quotation from 
Neander, Rose's Translation, p. 186. 

"The festival of Sunday, like all other festivals, 
was always only a human ordinance, and it was far 
from the intentions of the apostles to establish a divine 
command in this respect, far from them, and from the 
early apostolic church, to transfer the laws of the Sab- 
ba Ji to Sunday. Perhaps at the end of the second 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE 103 

century a false application of this kind had begun to take 
place; for men appear by that time to have considered 
laboring on Sunday as a sin." 

The foregoing might afford some comfort 
to Sabbatarians, were it not for the fatal fact 
that Neander himself expunged that state- 
ment from his history. I presume the state- 
ment may actually be found in the first edi- 
tion of Neander's history. Andrews himself 
confesses in a fine print footnote, that Nean- 
der did expunge the statement quoted. Here 
are Andrews' words: — 

"It is true that in re- writing his work, he [Nean- 
der] ommitted this sentence." 

Why did Neander omit that particular 
sentence in re-writing his history? There 
can be but one explanation. Neander, no 
doubt, discovered that his broad and sweep- 
ing declaration about Sunday observance be- 
ing only a "human ordinance" was not exactly 
true and would not stand the criticisms of the 
learned— and he therefore wisely omitted the 
statement. In view of the fact that Neander 
himself repudiated that statement it seems 
rather gaily for Andrews to quote it and seek 
for it the support of Neander's great name! 
Very likely Mr. Andrews sought to relieve 
his conscience a trifle by placing the fact of 
Neander's repudiation in a fine print footnote, 



104 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

while at the same time he no doubt reasoned 
that very few would ever read the fotenote. 
But then Sabbatarians must have some 
kind of arguments, and in the absence of any- 
thing better, we presume they should be al- 
lowed what comfort there is in such feats as 
this. The foregoing is a fair sample of their 
''authorities" and also of their manner of 
handling them. The Schaif-Herzog Eney. 
speaks of Neander as "the father of modern 
church history." 

Sect. 35. (b) Mosheim says (Sect. 35) in 
his history of the fourth century that as a re- 
sult of the edict of Constantine (Sect. 79) the 
lirst day of the week was regarded with 
"greater solemnity than it had formerly been." 
The edict commanded rest on that day. Ad- 
ventists at once jump to the conclusion that 
therefore before this edict Christians did not 
rest on that day. In drawing this conclusion 
they evidently get out of Mosheim' s language 
what he never intended to put into it. More 
than a hundred years -before this edict Ter- 
tullian (Sect. 19) had spoken of the advisabili- 
ty of Christians deferring their business af- 
fairs on the first day of the week. The 
thought that Mosheim intended and no doubt 
all that he intended, was this— that whereas 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 105 

before the edict only Christians had observed 
the day, that thereafter all classes, (agricul- 
turists excepted), pagans as well as Chris- 
tians, were required to defer business on that 
day. For the whole population to rest on 
that day would certainly be ' l greater solemn i- 
t</ : than where only a portion rested. 

Sect. 35. (c) Adventists continually 
complain that our authorities, historians, etc. 
are all first-day men. That is not our fault. 
It is a rule of evidence that every proposition 
to be proved must have brought to its sup- 
port the very best evidence obtainable. In 
this case the first-day authorities are the only 
ones from which to quote. There are no 
others. It has been our aim to quote only 
such authorities as are, by the consensus of 
the opinion of the religious world, entitled to 
consideration. It so happens that Seventh- 
day Adventism has produced no great histor- 
ian, commentator, scholar or theologian. 
That again is not our fault. If there were 
any authors among Sabbatarians whose pro- 
ductions rose above the level of mere parti- 
san quibblers they would gladly be heard. 
Seventh-day Adventism should not chide first- 
day authors with quoting only first day au- 
thorities, at least until they themselves pro 



106 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

duce something in the way of history or re- 
ligious literature that is worth being quoted. 
The real trouble is that all the historians are 
against Sabbatarianism and Sabbatarians know 
this to be the fact. Th^y have ransacked the 
earth and likely Mrs. White during some vis- 
ion has examined all the records of heaven 
itself to find something to offset the evident 
facts of history as presented by the histor- 
ians, encyclopedias, and Fathers of the early 
church. Finding nothing they now set up a 
whine that we quote "only first day authors." 

In a small volume which the author ex- 
pects to publish soon we shall quote very ex- 
tensively from Mrs. White the prophetess. By 
the time a Seventh-day Adventist completes 
the reading of ■ that little book he will in all 
probability be glad there are not many such 
luminaries among Adventists from which to 
quote. 

A volume of such testimonies might eas- 
ily be gathered. Lack of space forbids that 
we pursue this line of evidence further at 
present. 

The foregoing quotations are representa- 
tive of the conclusions of all generally recog- 
nized authorities among the historians. Sure- 
ly it requires a presumptious soul to set at 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 107 

naught the conclusion of the scholarship of 
the whole world upon a question of fact, such 
as is now on trial in this court, and upon which 
the jury of historians have reached so unani- 
mous a verdict. 



Chapter IV, 



WHAT THE ENCYCLOPEDIAS SAY. 

Sect. 36. In this chapter we shall give 
the testimony of the leading Encyclopedias. 
Their united voice that the first-day of the 
week has been observed as the "Lord's day*' 
from the Apostolic age down to the present is 
not to be disposed of with a simple sneer. 
Upon other historical matters we consult and 
rely upon the Encyclopedias. Why are they 
not reliable on this question? Does the fact 
of writing upon the "Lord's day" question 
change an otherwise honest and competent 
author into a dishonest incapable? 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 109 

Sect. 37. The Encyclopedia Britannica. 

•Sunday, or the Lord's Day. According to all 
the four evangelists, the resurrection of our Lord took 
place on the first day of the week after His crucifixion 
(Matt. 28:1, Mark 16:2, Luke 24:1, John 20:1, Mark 16:9) 
and the Fourth Gospel describes a second appearance 
to His disciples as having occured eight days after- 
wards (John 20:26). Apart from this central fact of the 
Christian faith, the Pentecostal outpouring of the Spir- 
it, seven weeks later, described in Acts 2, cannot have 
failed to give an additional sacredness to the day in the 
eyes of the earliest converts. Whether the primitive 
church in Jerusalem had any special mode of observing 
it in its daily meetings held in the temple (Acts 2:46) 
we cannot tell; but as there is no doubt that in these 
gatherings the recurrence of the Sabbath was marked 
by appropriate Jewish observances, so it is not impro- 
bable that the worship on xhe first-day of the week had 
also some distinguishing feature. Afterwards, at all 
events, when Christianity had been carried to other 
places, where, from the nature of the case daily meet- 
ings for worship were impossible, the first day of the 
week was everywhere set apart for this purpose. Thus 
Acts 20:7 shows that the disciples in Troas met weekly 
on the first-day of the week for exhortation and the 
breaking of bread; 1 Cor. 16:2 ; mplies at least some ob- 
servance of the day; and the solemn commemorative 
character it had very early acquired is strikingly indi- 
cated by an incidental expression of the writer of the 
Apocolypse (1:10) who for the first time gives it that 
name ("'the Lord's day") by which it is almost invaria- 
bly referred to by all writers of the century immediate- 
ly succeeding Apostolic times." 



110 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

Sect, 38. Johnson's Universal Ency. 
Article "Sabbath." 

"The resurrection of Christ and his subsequent 
appearances to his disciples till his ascension, and the 
miraculous descent of the Holy Spirit on the first-day 
of the week, led to that day being set apart for the spe- 
cial religious assemblies of the Christians and for the 
simple services of their faith. For a time the Jewish 
converts observed both the seventh-day, to which the 
name Sabbath continued to be given exclusively, and 
the first-day which came to be called the Lord's day. 
St. Paul sought to relieve the consciences of the Gen- 
tile Christians from the obligation of keeping the Jew- 
ish Sabbath, and .warned them that such observance 
might even be an evidence of backsliding (Col. 2:16; 
Gal. 4:10). Within a century after the death of the last 
of the apostles we find the observance of the first- day 
of the week, under the name of the Lord's day, estab- 
lished as a universal custom of the church." 



Sect. 39. Schaff-Herzog Ency. of Relig- 
ious Knowledge. 

"Sunday, the first day of the week, was adopted by 
the early Christians as a day ol worship." 

"Sunday was emphatically the weekly feast of the 
resurrection of Christ, as the Jewish Sabbath was the 
feast of the creation. It was called the "Lord's day" 
and upon it the primitive church assembled to break 
bread (Acts 20,7; 1 Cor. 16:2). No regulations for its 
observance are laid down in the New Testament, nor 
indeed, is its observance even enjoined; yet Christian 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. Ill 

feeling led to the adoption of the day, in imitation of 
the Apostolic precedent. In the second century its ob- 
servance was universal." 

"The Jewish Christians ceased to observe the Sab- 
bath after the destruction of Jerusalem." 

"Lord's day, the oldest and best designation of the 
Christian Sabbath; first used by St. John, Rev. 1:10," 



Sect. 40. Ency. of Religious Knowledge. 
(Christian Literature Co., New York, 1890.) 
Article "Sabbath." 

"The early Christian fathers refer to the first-day 
of the week as the time set apart for worship, and this 
usage prevailed over the whole church, but it was not 
till the time of Constantine, A, D. 321, that an edict 
was issued requiring a certain degree of abstinence 
from labor on the Lord's day or Sunday." 

"For a time Jewish believers observed the seveath 
day also, but they did not require this of any (Col. 
2:16)." 



Sect. 41. The Penny Ency. Article, 
"Sunday." 

"Sunday, the first-day of the week. Besides the 
name of 'Sunday,' it was called by the early Christians 
'the Lord's dav,' from its being the day on which the 
resurrection of Christ took place; and it was kept sa- 
cred in commemoration of that event." 



112 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

Sect. 42. Rees'sCy. Article "Sunday." 

"Sunday, ths first day of the week." 

"The appellation of 'Lord's day' was adopted by 
the earliest Christian writers. At the time when St. 
John wrote the book of his revelation, the first-day of 
the week had obtained this name (Rev. 1:10)." 

"We have reason to believe, that by the 'Lord's 
day 1 was meant 'the first day of the week;' because we 
find no traces of any distinction of days, which could 
entitle any other to that appellation ; accordingly this 
appellation was used both by the Greek and Latin 
churches." 



Sect. 43. New American Eney. Article 
"Lord's day." 

"Lord's day, the legal name of Sunday. In the 
early ages of Christianity, it does not seem to have 
been supposed that Sunday had taken the place of the 
Jewish Sabbath; but from the days of the Apostles it 
was regarded with veneration, as the dies dominica, or 
the Lord's day." 



Sect. 44. Biblical, Theological, and Ec- 
clesiastical Cy., by M'Clintoek & Strong*. Ar- 
ticle "Sunday" : — 

"It is called, also, the Lord's day, its sacred ob- 
servances being especially in his honor. The apostles 
themselves introduced the religious observance of Sun- 
day, meeting for divine service (Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 16:2), 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 113 

and the opposition in the Christian church to Judaism 
early led to the substitution of Sunday for the Sab bath." 

"The great care and concern of the primitive 
Christians for the religious observance of Sunday is 
seen in their ready and constant attendance upon all the 
offices and solemnities of public worship, and this too, 
even in times of persecution; from their studious ob- 
servance of the vigils, or nocturnal assemblies preced- 
ing the Lord's day; from their attendance, in many 
places, upon sermons twice a day, and at evening pray- 
ers; and from the censures inflicted upon those who 
violated the laws concerning the religious observance 
of the day. The celebration of the eucharist was a 
standing part of divine service every Lord's day, and 
every communicant was expected to partake thereof . " 
Article "Sabbath." In speaking of the 
first day of the week it is said: — 

"It is called the Lord's day, kuriake, a term other- 
wise only used in the New Testament in reference to 
the sacred supper (1 Cor. 11:20), and as in the latter 
passage it denotes that which specially commemorates 
the death of our Lord, it seems indisputable that it is 
applied in the former to that which specially commem- 
orates his resurrection (Rev. 1:10)." 

"The first-day of the week has always been ob- 
served by the Christian Church in memory of Christ's 
resurrection." 



Sect. 44. (a) Kitto's Cy. of Biblical Lit- 
erature. Article "Lord's' day": — 

"The expression so rendered in the Authorized 
English Version {he kuriake hemera) occurs only once in 



114 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

the New Testament, viz. in Rev. 1:10, and is there un- 
accompanied by any other words tending to expiain its 
meaning. It is, however, well known that the same 
phrase was, in after ages of the Christian Church, used 
to signify the first day of the week, on which the resur- 
rection of Christ was oommemorated." 



Sect. 44. (b) International Ency. Arti- 
cle, Sabbath: — 

% 'By none of the fathers is any Sabbath-law what- 
ever represented as being in force among the Gentiles." 
Vol. 12, p. 839. 

"For several years after the death of Jesus the 
Church included none but Jews, and by these the Sab- 
bath and other Mosaic rites continued to be observed 
as before," p. 858. 

It is not stated in the New Testament that 
the Jewish Christians continued to observe 
the Sabbath. This fact however is brought 
out by the historians. At the same time the 
historians also tell us that they likewise con- 
tinued to cling to all the rites and ceremonies 
of the entire Mosaic law. It seemed impossi- 
ble for the early converts among the Jews to 
realize that the law of Moses was obsolete. 
Even the Apostles seem to have observed the 
ceremonial feature of the law, although they 
knew they were not binding. Paul about the 
year 58, was going up to Jerusalem for the 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 115 

feast of Pentecost (Acts 20:16). The same 
Apostle went into the temple in connection 
with certain rites pertaining to the Nazarite 
vow and gave his sanction to the proceedure 
(Acts 21:17-26), and he also circumcised Tim- 
othy (Acts 16:1-3). None of these Jewish 
rites are binding upon Christians, although 
observed by the New Testament church and 
even by the Apostles themselves. And if it 
is a fact, though not stated in the New Tes- 
tament, that the Jewish Christians did keep 
the Sabbath along with circumcision, what of 
it? The masses of the Christians still clung 
to the old rites in ignorance of the fact of 
their abolition. Congregations that were free 
from Jewish influence did not observe the 
Sabbath. And Paul finally declared the aboli- 
tion of meats, drinks, feast days, new moon? 
and Sabbaths (Col. 2:16-17). 



Chapter V. 



TESTIMONY FROM THE DICTIONARIES. 

Sect. 45. A "Catholic Dictionary." By 
Addis and Arnold. Article, "Sunday." 

"In commemoration of Christ's resurrection the 
Church observes Sunday." 

"Sunday is merely of ecclesiastical institution, dat- 
ing, however, from the time of the apostles. Such is 
the opinion of St. Thomas and of the greatest Catholic 
theologians." 

"In a single passage of the New Testament, viz: 
Apoc. 1:10 — we find a special name for the first day of 
the week, "the Lord's day." 

After a reference also to Acts 20:7, and 1 

Cor. 16:2 the writer says: 

"The scriptural reference given above show that 
the observance of Sunday had begun in the Apostlic 
age." 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 117 

Sect. 46. Diet, of Christian Antiquities 
By Wm. Smith and Prof. Cheetham. Article 
"Lord's day." 

"Lord's Day. The origin of the name is undoubt- 
edly to be found in the well known passage Rev, 1:10, 
hekuriake hemera . Even if that passage stood alone, it 
would be difficult to accept either of the rival interpre- 
tations, one of which refers the naive to the Sabbath, 
and the other to the 'Day of the Lord. ' But taking into 
consideration the remarkable catena of patristic usage 
which, from Ignatius downwards, establishes the re- 
gular and technical use of he kuriake for the 'first-day of 
the week,' it is not too much to say that these interpre- 
tations may be dismissed as unworthy of serious atten- 
tion." 

"Turning from the name to the thing, it seems im- 
possible to doubt that from the earliest existence of the 
church the Lord 's day was observed as the character- 
istic Christian festival, hallowed as a commemoration 
of that Resurrection of the Lord, which was the leading 
subject in the earliest forms of Christian preaching.' 



Sect. 47. Smith's Bible Diet. Article 
"Lord's day" After alluding to and quot- 
ing in Latin Constantine's decree of 321 says: 

"Some have endeavored to explain away this docu- 
ment by alleging — 

"4th. That Constantine then instituted Sunday 
for the first time as a religious day for Christians, 

The fourth of these statements is absolutely refut- 
ed, both by the quotations made above from writers o 



118 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

the second and third centuries, and by the terms of the 
edict itself. It is evident that Constantine, accepting 
as facts the existence of the 'Solis Dies,' and the rev- 
erence paid to it by some one or other, does nothing 
more thaa make that reverence practically universal. 
It is 'venerabilis' already." 

"Richard Baxter has well summed up the history 
of the Lore's day at this point, and his words may not 
unaptly be inserted here: 'That the first Christian 
emperor, finding all Christians unanimous in the pos- 
session of the day, should make a law, as our kings do, 
for the due observing of it; and that the first Christian 
council should establish uniformity in the very gesture 
of worship on that day, are strong confirmations of the 
matter of fact, that the churches unanimously agreed 
in the holy use of it, as a separated day even from and 
in the Apostle's days. (Richard Baxter, On the Divine 
Appointment of the Lord's day, p. 41, 1671.)" 



Chapter VL 



THE COMMENTATORS ON REV. 1:10. 

Sect. 48. Albert Barries. 

''The word here rendered Lord's — kuriakos — occurs 
only in this place and in 1 Gor. 11:20, where it is ap- 
plied to the Lord's supper. It properly means pertain- 
ing to the Lord) and so far as this word is concerned, it 
might mean a day pertaining to the Lord in any sense, 
or for any reason — either because he claimed it as his 
own and had set it apart for his own service; or be- 
cause it was designed to commemorate some important 
event pertaining to him; or because it was observed in 
honor of him, It is clear (1) that this refers to some 
day which was distinguished from all other days of the 
week and which would be sufficiently designated by 
the use of the term. (2) That it was a day which was 
for some reason regarded as peculiarly a day of the Lord 



120 THIRTEEN CHAPTEKS ON 

or peculiarly devoted to him. (3) It would further ap- 
pear that this was a day particularly devoted to the 
'Lord Jesus' for (a) that is the natural meaning of the 
word Lord as used in the New Testament, and (b) if the 
Jewish Sabbath were intended to be designated, the 
word Sabbath would have been used. The term was 
used generally by the early Christians to denote the 
first day of the week." * "No one can doubt that it 
was an appellation given to the first-day of the week, ' 
etc. 



Sect. 49. Lange's Commentary — Edited 
by Schaff. 

"On the Lord's "day * * on Sunday (Acts 20:7, 1 
Cor. 11:20, 16:2)." 

Sect. 50. The Bible Commentary. 
"On the Lord's day, 'the first day of the week,' the 
day of the Lord's resurrection." 



Sect. 51. Meyer's N. T. Commentary. 

"The kuriake hemera is the first-day of the week, 
the Sunday, which was celebrated as the day of the 
Lord's resurrection." 



Sect. 52. Matthew Henry. 

"Surely this can be no other than the Christian 
Sabbath; the first-day of the week, to be observed in 
remembrance of the resurrection of Christ. " 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 121 

Jamieson — Fausset — Brown. 

"Though foicibly detained from church commun- 
ion with the brethren in the sanctuary on the Lord's 
day, the weekly commemoration of the resurrection, 
John was holding spiritual communion with them." 



Sect. 53. Quotations in this section are 
from Canright's Seventh-day ■ Ad ventism Re- 
nounced, pp. 191-192. 
Dr. Clark. 

''The Lord's day. The first-day of the week." 

Scott. 

"On the Lord's day, which can be meant of no oth- 
er than the day on which the Lord Jesus arose from 
the dead, even the first day of the week." 

Eclectic Commentary. 

"The Lord's day, the Christian Sibbath, the first- 
day of the week." 



Chapter VII. 



THE FIRST DAY OF THE WEEK AT CORINTH 
AND AMONG THE CHURCHES OF GAL.ATIA. 

Now concerning the collection for the 
saints, as I gave order to the churches of 
Galatia, so also do ye. Upon the first day of 
the week let each one of you lay by him in 
store, as he may prosper, that no collections 
be made when I come. — 1 Cor. 16:1-2. 



Sect. 54. In the Greek, 1 Cor. 16:2 begins 
as follows— kata mian sabbaton. etc. In both 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 123 

the A. V. and R. V. this is translated, "Upon 
the first day of the week." 

kata mian sabbaton 
Upon the first [day] of the week. 

As this translation now stands it does of 
course carry the idea that the duty here com- 
manded was to be attended to upon each re- 
currence of the first-day of the week. But 
this translation is not entirely correct. The 
Greek word kata should here be translated by 
the English word '''Every''' or its equivalent; 
and 1 Cor. 16:2 should read substantially as 
follows — "On every first day of the week," etc 
Can this position be sustained? It can, by an 
abundant and overwhelming array of authori- 
ties, First, let us give attention to the trans- 
lations. 

1. American Bible Union. "On each first 
day of the week." 

2. Living Oracles. (Translation by Doc- 
tors George Campbell, James Macknight, and 
Philip Doddridge.) "On the first-day of every 
week." 

3. Interlinear New Testament. (Pub- 
ished by Arthur Hinds and Company, New 
York.) "Every first day of the week." 

4. Emphatic Diaglott. (Translation by 
Benj. Wilson). "Every first day of the 



124 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

week." 

5. Murdock's Translation of the Syriac 
New Testament. "On each first day of the 
week." 

6. Young's Bible Translation. (Author 
also of Analytical Concordance to the Bible). 
"On every first day of the week." 

7. Noye's N. T. Translation. "Every 
first day of the week. " 



Sect. 55. Let us next have the testimony 
of two of the best commentators. 

1. Meyer's Com. on the New Testament. 
1 Cor. 16:2. u Kata mian sabbaton, on each 
first day of the week." 

2. James Macknight, On the Epistles. 1. 
Cor. 16-2. "On the first day of every week. 
Kata mian sabbaton. * * And as kata polin 
signifies every city; and kata mena, every 
month; and Acts 14:23, katf ekklesia, in every 
church. So kata mian sabbaton, signifies the 
first day of every week." 

Argument is unnecessary. A position 
sustained by the foregoing list of high author- 
ities may be regarded as settled. Wittingly 
or unwittingly, J. N. Andrews, the foremost 
historian of Seventh-day Adventism, in his 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 125 

History of the Sabbath p. 176, confesses that 
the duty here ordained whatever that duty 
was, was to be attended to "on each first day 
of the week." We quote — 

" 'Upon the first day of the week, let every one of 
you lay by Mm in store. ' But what do these words or- 
dain? Oaly one answer can be returned: They or- 
dain precisely the reverse of a public collection. Each 
one should lay by himself on each first day of the week 
according as God has prospered him, that when Paul 
should arrive, they might have their bounty ready." 

Whether Mr. Andrews was aware that 
"each first day" was the correct translation, 
or unintentionally blundered into a statement 
of the truth, quaere-, but the fact remains nev- 
ertheless. As to whether this was a public or 
private collection we shall shortly discuss. 

Sect. 56. The First Corinthian letter was 
written by Paul at Ephesus about the year A. 
D. 57. He directs the church at Corinth to 
collect offerings to be sent to the brethren at 
Jerusalem. It was Paul's expectation to visit 
Corinth and send this bounty to Jerusalem by 
the hands of those recommended by the Cor- 
inthian church (1 Cor. 16:1-4), and the Apos- 
tle thought that he might possibly go to Jeru- 
salem with them. With these facts in mine 
let us now notice the reason why Paul 
commands that this offering be taken on the 



126 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

first-day of the week, viz. — "that no collections 
be made when I come." The church met each 
first-day of the week. At such times the 
brethren were all together in one place. Here 
the offerings were made, and placed, no doubt, 
in the church treasury. This would avoid 
the necessity of taking "collections" when 
the apostle arrived. If, as Mr. Andrews sug- 
gests, and as Sabbatarians contend, this col- 
lection ordered by the Apostle was only a pri- 
vate affair and there was in fact no public as- 
sembly of the church on the first-day of the 
week — then the offerings of the various mem- 
bers would still have been at their private res- 
idences when Paul arrived in Corinth and the 
"collection" would still remain to be taken. 
We have heard of a man who "traveled in a 
gang all by himself, alone," and that seems to 
be the Seventh-day Aventist idea about tbis 
collection that Paul enjoins — that each mem- 
ber of the church, on the first-day of the week, 
was to take up a collection "all by himself 
alone at home." Bat for each member to 
merely set aside something at home would 
leave the collection yet to be taken when Paul 
arrived^ and yet the very thing that Paul aim- 
ed to avoid, was the necessity of taking the 
"collections" after his arrival at Corinth. The 
Apostle wanted them to have the money ready 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 127 

when be reached Corinth, but if the money 
was still scattered around at the homes of the 
various members, according to the Sabbatar- 
ian theory, the fund would not be ready, and 
the collection would still remain to be taken. 
To picture out Paul as supposing that the 
mere setting aside of a sum by the members 
at home on each first-day of the week, would 
avoid the necessity of a collection in order to 
have the fund ready for transportation to Je- 
rusalem, is to make him out a fool. There is 
but one rational explanation of Paul's com- 
mand and conclusion in this passage. The 
church met each first-day of the week — upon 
these occasions the members brought their 
offerings together and deposited them in the 
church treasury. As a matter of course, 
when Paul reached Corinth the fund would be 
ready to forward to Jerusalem and there 
would be no "collections" necessary after his 
arrival. It is a necessary inference from this 
passage that there was a meeting of the church 
upon the first-day of each week. 



Sect. 57. The command found in 1 Cor. 
16:1-2 was not confined to the one church at 
Corinth, but the same instruction had been given 
to the "churches of Galatia" (1 Cor. 16:1). 



128 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

The churches of Galatia must then also have 
been in the habit of holding their church as- 
semblies on the first-day of each week. Gala- 
tia was a large interior province of Asia Minor 
and the Galatian letter was addressed to the 
churches of that province. It is then a thing 
proven, that the church at Corinth and the 
churches of Galatia held their congregational 
assemblies on each first-day of the week. That 
which was the practice of these churches was 
no doubt the general custom everywhere, for 
it is an unsupportable assumption to suggest 
that a part of the church observed one day 
and a part a different day. And this First 
Corinthian letter was addressed, not only to 
the brethren at Corinth, but to u all that call 
upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ in 
every place," (1 Cor. 1:2). 



Sect. 58. In 1 Cor. 16:2, Paul commands 
each one to lay u by him" in store. Sabbatar- 
ians make a great fuss over the expression 
"by him." These words, so they contend, 
necessarily mean "by him at home." The 
Greek is par heauto. par (by) heauto (him). That 
these Greek words do not necessarily mean, ' i by 
himself at home," we shall endeavor to prove 
by an appeal to the authorities. 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 129 

1. The Emphatic Diaglott renders par 
heauto — ' 'by itself. ' ' 

2, The Living Oracles likewise translate 
these words — "by itself." 

2. Rotherham's Translation also renders 
simply by — "by itself." 

These authorities show it to be entirely 
permissible to render par heauto simply by 
the words "by itself." So far as the Greek 
par heauto, or the English equivalent, "by it- 
self, " or, "by him," are concerned, the refer- 
ence might be, indifferently, to a public col- 
lection or to a setting aside of a fund at home. 
The specific reference in this particular place 
must be determined by the context. The lat- 
ter part of the 2nd verse is decisive on this 
point. The putting "by itself" had reference 
to some sort of a Church treasury into which 
all the members deposited their offerings, for, 
by this laying aside of money, all necessity of 
any collection after Paul's arrival at Corinth 
was to be avoided. And there could be no 
such collection as this on each first-day of the 
week without some regular meeting of the 
church upon that day. To say that par heauto 
means "by himself at home" is to add the 
words "at home" without authority and con- 
trary to authority as we have shown. 



130 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

That the Greek heauto might refer to a 
mere setting aside of funds at home is not de- 
nied. That there is anything in the word which 
necessarily implies a mere setting aside is 
emphatically denied. The following lexicons 
give as one meaning of the word heauto simply 
"itself." Westcott and Hart, Liedell and 
Scott, and also Strong. No doubt all other 
lexicons of any repute do the same. The tes- 
timony of these three is sufficient to establish 
the meaning of any word. Mr. Andrews in 
his History of the Sabbath, p. 177, quotes the 
oft quoted dictum of a certain Mr. J. W. Mor- 
ton, "late Presbyterian missionary toHayti," 
concerning par heauto. He there gives an al- 
ledged translation into English of certain La- 
tin, French, German, Dutch, Italian, Spanish, 
Portugese, and Swedish versions. To all this 
we merely reply: — (1) He presents no proof 
that his rendering of these versions is cor- 
rect, and (2) these versions are themselves 
only translations. They are not the original. 
The first Corinthian letter was written in 
Greek. The English renderingof the versions 
named, is, at best, only a translation of a 
translation. In our investigation we have 
appealed directly to the original Greek text, 
and in proving that to be in harmony with our 
position we have effectually cut off all neces- 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 131 

sity and likewise all propriety of any further 
discussion on this point. 

We have a dim recollection of having 
heard a Sabbatarian attack the argument based 
upon this scripture in the following scientific 
manner. Said he — u If a man had placed his 
offering in the church treasury, and then 
gone home, his offering would be no longer by 
him, but would, if the member lived distant 
from the treasury, be removed from him 
whereas the Apostle's command was to lay 
'by him.' " We replied — that if the member 
should lay aside his offering at home by him 
and then go to church at any time, he would 
also be separated from his offering and it 
would be longer by him. Such reasoning 
would preclude the idea of this offering being 
either public or private. That which proves 
too much, proves nothing. We have simply 
called attention to this quibble as a new illus- 
tration of the old proverb, that "drowning 
men catch at straws." However in this in- 
stance even the "straw" seems to be lacking. 



Sect. 59. We close this argument by 
quoting a few of the commentators on 1 Cor. 
16:1-2. While the followers of Ellen White 
may not find the sayings of the commentators 



132 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

very acceptable, yet to others their observa- 
tions may proove of value. 

1. Macknight, On the Epistles. 

"The Apostle means the treasury of the church; or 
some chest placed at the door of the church to receive 
their gifts. For although the Corinthians had separa- 
ted a sum weekly for the saints, yet if they kept it in 
their own possessions, the collections, as was observed 
in the preceding note, must still have been to make 
when the Apostle came, contrary to his intention. 
From this passage, it is evident that the Corinthian 
brethren were in use to assemble on the first-day of the 
week for the purpose of worshipping God. And asthe 
Apostle gave the same order to the Galatians, they 
likewise must have held their religious assemblies on 
the first day of the week." 

2. Jamieson. Fausset, & Brown. 
"First-day of the week already kept sacred by 

Christians as the day of the Lord's resurrection, the 
beginning day both of the physical and of the new 
spiritual creations." 

3. Doddridge. 

1 ' Treasuring it up. We render it. let every one of you 
Jay by him in store. But the following words show, that 
it was to be put into a common stock. The argument 
drawn from hence for the religious observation of the 
first-day of the week in these primitive churches of 
Corinth, and Galatia. is too obvious to need any farther 
illustration, and yet too important to be passed by in 
an entire silence." 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 133 

4. Adam Clark. 

"It appears from the whole, that the first-day of 
the week, which is the Christian Sabbath, was the day 
on which their principal religious meetings were held 
in Corinth and the churches of Galatia; and consequently 
in all other places where Christianity had ^prevailed.'' 

Sect. 59. (a) That it was the custom of 
the church at Corinth t to -observe the Lord's 
Supper when they met is evident from 1 Cor* 
1 1:20-34. It may be interesting as well as 
throwing important light upon this subject to 
read the Syriac of 1 Cor. 11:20. Here it is as 
translated by Murdock — "When therefore ye 
come together, ye eat and drink, not as is be- 
coming on the day of our Lord." 

The church at Corinth, as we have seen, 
met each first-day of the week, and as we shall 
yet see (Chapter on Acts 20:7). it was the uni- 
versal custom of the early church to observe 
the Supper every Sunday, and this day is 
called in the Syriac, "the day of our Lord." 
The Preshito Syriac (herein quoted), is "very 
generally admitted to be the oldest version 
that has come down to us, of the New Testa- 
ment in any language." This version comes 
from early in the second century, or may be, 
from even the first century. 

Schaff . Herzog, Article, Bible Versions, 
says of it; — 



/ 



1J4 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

"It is no improbable conjecture which assigns the 
version to the second century. 

While the Syriac version brings out no 
new fact, yet it serves as additional and con- 
clusive proof that the day upon which the 
Supper was generally observed was already, 
early in the second century, considered as 
"the day of our Lord," — as belonging to him 
— and John wrote Rev. 1:10 almost at the 
very close of the first century. 

Kitto's Cy. of Bib. Lit., Article, Syriac 

Versions says: — 

"The Preshito in the Old and New Testaments is 
one and the same version, having been made in the 
first century of the Christian era." 



Chapter VIIL 



THE MEETING AT TROAS. 

Acts 20:4-18, 25. 4. And there accom- 
panied him as far as Asia, Sopater of Beroea, 
the son of Pyrrhus; and of the Thessalon- 
ians, Aristarchus and -Secudus; and Gaius of 
Derbe and Timothy; and of Asia, Tychicus 
and Trophimus. 5. But these had gone be- 
fore, and were waiting for us at Troas. 6. 
And we sailed away from Philippi after the 
days of unleavened bread, and came unto 
them to Troas in five days ; where we tarried 
seven days. 7. And upon the first-day of the 
tveekj when we were gathered together to break 



136 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

bread, Paul discoursed with them, intending to 
depart on the morrotv; and prolonged his speech 
until midnight. 8. And there were many 
lights in the upper chamber, where we were 
gathered together. 9. And there sat in the 
window a certain young man named Antychus 
borne down with deep sleep; and as Paul dis- 
coursed yet longer, being borne down by his 
sleep, he feel down from the third story, and 
was taken up dead. 10. And Paul went 
down, and fell on him, and embracing him 
said, Make ye no ado; for his life is in him. 
11. And when he was gone up, and had bro- 
ken the bread, and eaten, and had talked with 
them a long while, even till break of day, so 
he departed. 12. And they brought the lad 
alive and were not a little comforted. 13. 
But we, going before to the ship, set sail for 
Assos, there intending to take in Paul; for so 
had he appointed, intending himself to go by 
land. 14. And when he met us at Assos, we 
took him in, and came to Mitylene. 15. And 
sailing from thence, we came the following 
day over against Chios; and the next day we 
touched at Samos; and the day after we came 
to Miletus. 16. For Paul had determined 
to sail past Ephesus, that he might not have 
to spend time in Asia; for he was hastening, 
if it were possible for him, to be at Jerusalem 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 137 

the day of Pentecost. 17. And from Miletus 
he sent to Ephesus, and called to him the eld- 
ers of the church. 18. And when they were 
come to him^ he said unto them, * * 25. 
And now, behold. I know that ye all, among 
whom I went about preaching the kingdom, 
shall see my face no more. 



Sect. 60. We have here an actual in- 
stance of a congregation of Christians meeting 
upon the first day of the week to attend to a 
solemn institution, the Lord's supper. This 
meeting was to attend to a Christian duty. It 
was a public assembly of Christians gathered 
for worship, on the first-day of the week. But, 
says the Sabbatarian quibbler, "This is only 
one instance." We reply — that is just one 
more instance in favor of the first-day of the 
week than the said Sabbatarian can find in the 
New Testament in favor of the Sabbath. In 
all the New Testament, though it covers the 
history of the church for fully sixty-five 
years, that is, from Pentecost to John's 
death, there is not recorded a single case of a 
congregation of Christians meeting upon the 
Sabbath, to attend to any Christian duty. If 
an actual case of a congregation meeting up- 
on the first day of the week proves nothing 



138 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

for first-day observers, in how much 
worse plight then must Sabbatarians be 
who cannot produce from all the New Testa- 
ment eyen a hint at one such occurence in fa- 
vor of the seventh-day of the week! ! Sab- 
batarians seize upon those instances where 
Paul went into the Jewish synagogues on the 
Sabbath and preached to his Jewish brethren 
— places where there were no organized 
churches — and where Paul went and preached 
simply because he could get a hearing there, 
and seem to imagine they have an argument. 
{Just as Seyenth-day Adventist preachers 
will — in a new place — hold extra service upon 
Sunday — and in some Sunday-keeping church 
building too — if one can be secured— because 
they can get a larger hearing under those cir 
cumstances than otherwise.) But when we 
point to that congregation of Christians at Troas 
actually meeting for worship on the first day 
of the week — oh, that don't prove anything! ! ! ! 
"Oh, Consistency, thou art a jewel" whose ra- 
diant presence seems ever to have eluded the 
Sabbatarian disputant. Mark well the exact 
point that we urge here — Acts 20:7 affords an 
instance of a congregation of Christians 
meeting upon the first-day of the Week to at- 
tend to an act of Christian worship. The fol- 
lowers of Ellen White can bring no such in- 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 139 

stance of a congregation of Christians meet- 
ing to attend to any act of Christian duty on 
the Sabbath — from the New Testament re- 
cord. We have proven the meaning of the 
term "Lord's day" as found in Rev. 1:10; we 
have shown a command in 1 Cor. 16:1-2 which 
necessarily implies a meeting of the Corin- 
thian and Galathian churches on the first-day 
of the week, and now we have produced an in- 
disputable occurence of a congregation of 
Christians meeting for worship on the first- 
day of the week. What more can reasonably 
be required? 

Sect. 61. Paul and his company were at 
Troas seven days. They must then have been 
there over one Sabbath day. There is not one 
word said about any meeting on the Sabbath, 
while the meeting on the first day of the week 
is written up at length. This circumstance 
is against the probability of there having 
been any Sabbath meeting. 

The observance of the Lord's Supper was 
reserved for the first-day of the week, and 
the primary purpose of the meeting was to 
"break bread" — as Luke puts it, "when we 
were gathered together to break bread" — that 
is — to observe the holy supper. Luke speaks 
of the matter as though it was a custom of 



140 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

the brethren so to do — and in the light of all 
that we have already seen in this investiga- 
tion, we may say with the utmost confidence 
that such was the case. If Luke had declared 
that the brethren met to hear Paul preach 
then there might possibly be some plausibil- 
ity in the suggestion that this was a special, 
called meeting to hear the great Apostle. 
Though Paul was among them it is not said 
that the appointment was occasioned by his 
presence. The church met to attend to a duty 
that was wholly independent of Apostolic 
presence. They were accustomed to attend 
to the Lord's Supper at stated periods. Every 
congregation did this. The church at Troas 
met as usual to attend to this duty on the 
first-day of the week, and ,Paul being there, 
preached to them. The preaching of Paul 
was a mere incident of the meeting. Thus it 
appears that the Troas meeting was no unus- 
ual or extraordinary affair. The church met, 
not especially to hear Paul or see the visiting 
brethren, but to attend to the ordinary duty 
of celebrating the memorial of Christ's suffer- 
ings. And of course met at the usual time — 
and thus it is that this meeting becomes a cer- 
tain index to the custom of that congregation. 
That which was the rule there, was no doubt 
the rule everywhere. 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 141 

Sect. 62. Paul's business in Troas was 
to meet the church there. It was his idea 
that this would be the last time he would see 
them, (verse 25). He did not own the ship in 
which he traveled. He and his company were 
only passengers. The ship sailed from Troas 
apparently sometime on the first-day of the 
week. It was no doubt known beforehand 
when the ship would depart. All of the com- 
pany except Paul left Troas on the vessel. 
By water it was about forty miles to Assos 
(verses 13-14). By land it was about nineteen 
miles. The A. V. says it was Paul's inten- 
tion to go "a-foot" to Assos (verse 13). The 
R. V. says "by land," but the marginal ren- 
dering even in the R. V. is "on foot." So we 
may consider it settled that Paul walked from 
Troas to Assos, a distance of nineteen miles. 
His traveling companions took the more com- 
fortable passage on the ship. Why did not 
Paul sail with the ship? Why did he not go 
with the remainder' of the company? Why 
did he impose upon himself the task of a nine- 
teen miles walk? This long tiresome journey 
followed immediately after a sleepless night 
(verse 11), most of which had been spent in 
the very exhausting work of preaching (vs. 
7, 11). There is but one explanation. It is 
this — Paul was determined to meet the church 



142 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

at Troas — there was no meeting of the church 
until the first-day of the week — the ship was 
due to leave before he could deliver his entire 
message to the brethren — hence, there was 
left to him but one of two courses — leave with 
the ship and leave many things unsaid that he 
much desired to say to the church at Troas — 
or, himself remain behind at Troas, preach 
all night, and then rush nineteen miles across 
the country on foot and rejoin the ship, which 
had to make a forty mile sail to reach the same 
point. Paul chose the latter course. If there 
had been any meeting of the church on the 
Sabbath he could have delivered his message 
to the brethren at that time, and no doubt 
would have done so, and then the hour for the 
ship's departure would have found his work 
in Troas finished and himself ready to sail 
with the remainder of the company. Paul 
was in Troas seven days (verse 6). He had 
reached there the preceding Monday. This 
was just too late for the regular weekly meet- 
ing of the church the preceding day. He had 
an abundance of time in which to have deliver- 
ed a dozen discourses to the church, but he 
had to wait until the church met and this did 
not happen until the next first-day of the week. 
If there had been a Sabbath meeting he could 
have been ready to depart with his traveling 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 143 

companions on board the ship. There was 
none and therefore the facts are as they are. 



Sect. 63. The Hebrews began the day at 
sunset under the Old Testament economy. 
The Romans reckoned the day from midnight 
to midnight. So far as our argument is con- 
cerned it makes no difference which method 
Luke reckoned by in this passage. Which- 
ever way it was the meeting at Troas was on the 
first-day of the week. If Luke uses the Rom- 
an method, then the meeting was on what we 
would style Sunday evening. If we adopt 
this view it is objected that the observance of 
the Lord's Supper did not in fact occur until 
Monday morning, as it seems that Paul's first 
address lasted until midnight and that it was 
after this that the loaf was broken. This ob- 
jection however seems to be without weight. 
It would have been no sin to have broken the 
bread on Monday, and this passage shows 
conclusively that it was the custom of this 
church to meet on the first-day of the week to 
break bread, and that it did meet upon that 
day for that purpose in this instance, and was 
only prevented from carrying out the usual 
order by the unusually lengthy discourse of 
the Apostle. As we have observed, there was 



144 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

no impropriety in observing the Supper on 
Monday morning, and so far as we know, there 
was no peremptory command that the Supper 
be observed each first day of the week, though 
this seems to have been the custom. And in- 
asmuch as the weekly observance of the holy 
Supper grew up under the eyes of the Apos- 
tles themselves, it would seem eminently pro- 
per that all who seek the good old paths of 
the Apostolic way should do likewise. How- 
ever, in the absence of any positive command, 
there was then, and could be now, no sin or 
even impropriety, in defering the Supper un- 
til after midnight, especially where the ser- 
vices were solemn and continuous during the 
entire preceding part of the night. The fore- 
going remarks are based opon the supposition 
that it is a thing well proven that the holy 
Supper was not observed until after midnight. 
As a matter of fact it is not and cannot, be 
proven that the Lord's Supper was defer ed 
upon that occasion until midnight. T wice in 
this 20th chapter of Acts the breaking of 
bread is spoken of (verses 7 and 11.) It is 
true the language in both instances is very 
much the same and yet the latter instance 
(verse 11) may possibly refer simply to re- 
freshments partaken of by Paul. The lang- 
uage is, ' 'when he (Paul) was gone up, and had 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 145 

broken the bread, and eaten," etc. It is said 
that this only means that Paul presided at the 
table of the Lord. The language may possi- 
bly mean no more than that, and yet the state- 
ment as it stands would fib in equally as well 
and indeed better, with the theory that this 
]atter breaking of bread had reference to food 
taken by Paul to sustain his physical strength. 
It will be noticed that Paul's traveling com- 
panions were at the meeting early in the even- 
ing. 

In verses 7 and 8, Luke says; "we" show- 
ing that Luke and no doubt the remainder of 
Paul's company were presented in the early 
part of the service. They left to take the 
ship before the long night meeting closed. It 
was no doubt known before the service began 
that they could only remain a short time. 
Under these circumstances it would seem pro- 
bable that the memorial of our Savior's sacri- 
fice would be celebrated during the first part 
of the service in order that these brethren 
might enjoy the privilege of partaking of the 
Supper with the church before their depart- 
ure. If the facts lie with the probabilities, 
then the Supper was not deferred until after 
midnight, and the breaking of bread in verse 
7 was the Lord's Supper and attended to ear- 



146 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

ly in the evening and verse 11 only refers to 
food taken by Paul. This is not a matter about 
which to be dogmatical. These observations 
are made merely to bring out the fact that it 
is not settled that the Supper was delayed un- 
til Monday morning, and that if it was so de- 
layed, that even then our argument is not 
weakened. The popular hour at which the Sup- 
per was observed is not the controlling issue. 
After all is said and done it still remains a 
fact that the Troas church met upon the first- 
day of the week to attend to a Christian duty. 
And facts are stubborn things. 



Sect. 64. Suppose, however, that Luke 
reckons time after the Hebrew manner — what 
then? Only this, that in that case the meet- 
ing at Troas would have occured on what we 
would call Saturday evening, but not on what 
Luke would have called Saturday evening. 
Right here Sabbatarians attempt to confuse 
the minds of people and create the impression 
that this meeting occured on Saturday. The 
statement of Andrews in his Hist, of the Sab- 
bath, p. 181, is a fair sample of their slight- 
of-hand trickery on this point. Mr. Andrews 
says: — 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 147 

"From this follows the important consequence that 
this first-day meeting was upon Saturday night," 

The foregoing statement is full of decep- 
tion — as carrying with it, to the uncritical 
midd, the idea that this was not, after all, a 
first-day of the week meeting. Now the 
meeting was a night meeting for there were 
u many lights, " (verse 8). If Luke reckoned 
time from sunset to sunset, as Sabbatarians, 
without one particle of proof always assert, 
then Saturday ended at sunset, -and the first- 
day of the week at once began, and this meet- 
ing, according to Luke's method of reckoning 
time, was not on a Hebrew Saturday at all, but 
on the first-day of the week. Sabbatarians 
first assert that Luke used the Hebrew meth- 
od of reckoning time. This they cannot 
prove. They next assume that the average 
person will forget to weigh carefully the dif- 
ference between a Hebrew Saturday and our 
Saturday. They then assert that the Troas 
meeting was on Saturday night — and leave 
the hearer or reader to infer that it was real- 
ly a Sabbath meeting. But if Luke really reck- 
oned time as they claim, this meeting was after 
the Hebrew Saturday was past and the first- 
day had begun. Our Saturday ends at mid- 
night, but, allowing the Sabbatarian Hebrew 



148 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

time in this passage, Luke's Saturday would 
end at sunset. Luke says this meeting was 
on the first-day of the week, and everybody 
except infidels and Seventh-day Adventists 
concede his statement to be correct. Neither 
of these classes however are ever satisfied 
with what the Bible says. Infidels prefer 
Paine and Ingersol], and the Battle Creek Ad- 
ventists prefer the visions of Ellen White. 
When Paul declares (Col. 2:13-17) the Sabbath 
to have been abolished along with the feasts, 
new moons, etc., Sabbatarians at once set 
about to prove that he^ did not mean what he 
said — and that the Sabbath is still binding, 
and when Luke declares (Acts 20:7) that the 
church at Troas met on the first-day of the 
week to break bread, Sabbatarians at once as- 
sert that said meeting was on Saturday night! ! 
Who shall presume to measure the dire con- 
sequences of such unholy juggling with the 
word of the Almighty? 



Sect. 65. It may be asked — Why do Sab- 
batarians make such desperate efforts to cre- 
ate the impression that Luke used the Hebrew 
method of reckoning time? Because if Luke 
dees use that method, then Paul left Troas 
early on the morning of the first-day of the 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 149 

week, and traveled nineteen miles to Assos on 
that da}^, thereby proving, so they say, that 
Paul did not regard the day as the ''Lord's 
day" or as in any sense sacred. And upon 
this point the Sabbatarian debater usually 
spreads his wings for a lofty sail — and some- 
times comes down with ]ess of grace and visi- 
ble satisfaction than was manifest in his spec- 
tacular ascension. Some years ago the author 
was engaged in public debate with a Sabbatar- 
ian, and our opponent was urging the point 
that Paul traveled on Sunday. It so happened 
that we had been at the railway depot in 
that self-same town some days before— and as 
fate would have it, upon Saturday too— yes, 
upon the Sabbath — and there we saw and con- 
versed with the co-laborer of our opponent — 
and he was waiting for a train to arrive — and 
was expecting our opponent to come in on 
that train. Yes, one Adventist preacher at 
the depot on the Sabbath expecting another 
Adventist preacher to arrive on a train — and 
all on the Sabbath too — horror of horrors!!! 
After our opponent had expatiated sufficient- 
ly and apparently to his satisfaction, we called 
the attention of the audience to. the facts as 
they had occured at the depot. Seeing that 
the atmosphere was getting unhealthy our op- 
ponent's moderator jumped up and explained 



150 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

that Bro. C had an appointment, — and 

therefore the Sabbath traveling — and we 
promptly explained that Brother Paul had an 
appointment to catch up with that ship, so 
that he might reach Jerusalem by the day of 
Pentecost (verse 16) and therefore the Sun- 
day traveling — and for some reason not stated 
to the audience, we heard nothing more about 
Paul having traveled on Sunday. Paul and 
his companions did not own that ship. They 
were only passengers, and were making a 
long journey, and when the ship sailed on 
Sunday they went with it. Paul, in order to 
complete his work with the Troas church, re. 
mained in Troas a few hours after the ship's 
departure and then cut across lots and board- 
ed the vessel at Assos. When Sabbatarians 
are making a long journey, do they have the 
railroad and steamship lines stop at sundown 
on Friday evening and wait until the Sabbath is 
past before proceeding? To ask the question 
is to answer it. Neither did Paul and his 
companions own or control that sailing vessel. 
It was go when the ship went or never get to 
Jerusalem. When Sabbatarians are making a 
long journey, do they, when sundown comes 
Friday evening, jump off the train or vessel 
then carrying them and wait for another after 
sundown Saturday evening? No, they have 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANC H 151 

plenty of sense when traveling, but in debate 

So then Paul and his companions may 

have traveled all day Sunday and regarded it 
as the Lord's day. It is never said that Paul 
ever stopped in a single instance in all his 
journeys on account of the Sabbath coming 
on. So far as the record informs us he al- 
ways traveled right ahead, Saturday, Sunday, 
and every other day. It would be quite in- 
convenient for even a follower of El J en White 
to climb off a ship in mid-ocean at sundown, 
Friday evening and swim around in that par- 
ticular spot until another vessel happened 
along after the Sabbath was past. Perhaps 
however a Sabbatarian would make a raft of 
Sister's White's visions under such circum- 
stances, and, inasmuch as no shark could ever 
swallow that vision on "dress reform," we 
presume he would be as safe as though he 
were on an ocean liner. Selah. 



Sect. 66. Which method of reckoning 
time does Luke use? We do not know cer- 
tainly. Adventists assert that the scriptural 
method is to measure the day from sunset 
to sunset. It is true that this seems 
to have been the order under the law of Mo- 
ses. But we do not live under the Jewish 



152 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

dispensation. We are under the Gospel and 
under the new law of Christ no particular 
method of reckoning time is commanded. We 
are left free to do as we please about that 
matter. Both the Hebrew and Roman meth- 
ods of reckontng time obtain in the scrip- 
tures. When Sabbatarians assert that to 
reckon time from midnight to midnight is un- 
scriptural, they merely expose their ignor- 
ance, that is all, unless we charge them with 
outright dishonesty. The Apostle John in 
his Gospel in at least one passage does not 
use Hebrew time but Roman time rather. 
Jno. 20:19 says, "When therefore it was even- 
ing, on that day, the first-day of the week, 
and when the doors were shut where the dis- 
ciples were, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came 
and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, 
Peace be unto you." This was the appear- 
ance of Jesus to his disciples on the day of 
his resurrection. Jesus arose early on the 
first-day of the week (Mark 16:9). We now 
turn to the 24th chapter of Luke to show that 
this meeting of Jesus with the disciples in 
Jerusalem on the day of his resurrection 
must have been quite late in the evening. 
Luke 24:13-16— " And behold, two of them 
were going that very day to a village named 
Emmaus, which was threescore furlongs from 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 153 

Jerusalem. And they communed with each 
other of all these things which had happened. 
And it came to pass, while they communed 
and questioned together, that Jesus himself 
drew near, and went with them. But their 
eyes were holden that they should not know 
him." Also verses 28-36— u And they drew 
nigh unto the village, whither they were go- 
ing: and he made as though he would go fur- 
ther. And they constrained him, saying, 
Abide with us: for it is toward evening, and 
the day is now far spent. And he went in to 
abide with them. And it came to pass, when 
he had sat down with them to meat, he took the 
bread, and blessed it, aad brake, and gave to 
them. And their 'eyes were opened and they 
knew him; and he vanished out of their sight. 
And they said one to another, Was not our heart 
burning within us, while he spake to us in 
the way, while he opened to us the scrip- 
tures? And they rose up that very hour and 
returned to Jerusalem, and found the eleven 
gathered together, and them that were with 
them, saying, The Lord is risen indeed, and 
hath appeared to Simon. And they rehearsed 
the things that happened in the way, and how 
he was known of them in the breaking of the 
bread. And as they spake these things, he 
himself stood in the midst of them, and saith 



. 154 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

unto them, Peace be unto you." This is the 
same meeting as that recorded in Jno. 20:19. 
By reading the connection, it is easily seen 
that the appearance of Jesus recorded in each 
of these scriptures is his first appearance to 
the Apostles as a body after his resurrection. 
We next call the attention of the reader to the 
distance of Emmaus from Jerusalem. It was 
threescore furlongs. The Greek word here 
translated "furlong" is stadion. It is defined 
as follows: — 
Liddell & Scott. 

"Stadion * 600 Greek or 606f English feet, about | 
of a Roman mile. ' ' 

Westcott & Hort. 

"Stadion, * the eight part of a Riman mile, and 
nearly equal to a furlong, containing 201.45 yards." 

Figuring upon the basis of Westcott & 
Hort's definition it will be found that Emma- 
us was 6.86 United States statute miles from 
Jerusalem. According to Liddell & Scott it 
would be a trifle further than that. 

Barnes in his Commentary on this pas- 
sage says, 

"Threescore furlong. Sixty furlongs, or about 
seven or eight miles." 

The place is now known as Kuriet el' 
Aineb. 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 155 

Dr. Thompson in The Land and the Book, 

says, 

"It took just three hour's moderate riding from 
Kuriet el' Aineb to Jerusalem." (Barnes Com. on Lu. 
24:) 

It should be remembered that in that land 
and time there were no leveled or paved 
roads. The country being so rough that to 
journey from Einmaus to Jerusalem requires 
three hours. When Jesus and the two disci- 
ples reached Emmaus, it was already "toward 
evening' ' and the day was "far spent'' (verse 
29.) This language indicates that the close of 
the day was near at hand. After this they sat 
down to eat and during the meal Jesus was 
made known to them, and then disappeared. 
That same hour they started back to Jerusa- 
lem — but it was about seven miles — and if 
they were supplied with beasts to carry them, 
it was a full three hours journey and must 
have been late in the evening, at least after 
sunset, before their arrival there. When 
they reached Jerusalem, they found the elev- 
en and were rehearsing to them the wonder- 
ful occurrences of the afternoon when they 
were interrupted by the appearance of Jesus. 
The conclusion cannot be resisted by the can- 
did and intelligent mind, in view of all the 
facts, that this appearance of Jesus was 



156 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

late on what we call Sunday evening. A 
cording to the Hebrew method of reckoning 
time, which Sabbatarians claim to be the only 
correct method to apply in scriptural matters, 
the first-day of the week ended at sundown 
and this appearance of Jesus was in fact on 
the second day of the week, or what we call 
Monday. According to the Roman method of 
reckoning time the first-day of the week 
would not have ended until midnight. This 
appearance of Jesus to his disciples was cer- 
tainly later than sundown, and yet John de- 
clares that it was on the u first-day of the 
week." John, therefore, in this place recog- 
nizes, and himself adopts and uses the Roman 
method, and reckons the dav from midnight 
to midnight. All this sputtering about the 
unscripturalness of reckoning time after 
the Roman method is mere bosh — John 
uses that method himself in Jno. 20:19. We 
are not doing violence, then, to the scriptures 
to suggest that Luke may have used the same 
method in Acts 20 :7. 

That the Jno. 20:19 meeting was after 

sundown is about conceded by Andrews (See 

Sect. 76). Already in our Saviour's time the 

Jews had adopted the Gentile method of divid- 

i ng the night. 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 157 

The Schaff-Herzog Ency. under Article, 
Day, says: — 

''The Jews, before the captivity, divided the night 
into three watches. * * In the New Testament, men- 
tion is made of four watches, because the Greek and Ro- 
man division was then adopted." 

It is mere assumption then to claim that 
New Testament writers confine themselves to 
the Jewish manner of reckoning the day. 
Further on this point we quote from the Diet. 

of Religious Knowledge, Article, Day. 

'•The Hebrews began their day in the evening, and 
they divided it into morning, noon, • and night (Psa. 
53:27). The mention of hours dates from the cap- 
tivity (Dan. 3:6), and the division is therefore doubt- 
less of Babylonian origin. The night was divided into 
three watches, from sunset to midnight, from midnight 
to cockcrow (Judg. 7:19), and from cockcrow to sunrise 
(Ex. 14:24.) But in New Testament times the Greek 
and Roman division into four watches was adopted." 

The assumption that the New Testament 
writers recognized only the ancient Hebrew 
division of the day and night is not well 
founded. 



Sect. 67. All the probabilities support 
the notion that Luke uses the Roman method 
in Acts 20:7. Prof. A. Rauschenbauch, of 
Rochester Theological Seminary says: — 

"These events did not occur in the time of the Old 
Testament, but of the New; not in Palestine, but upon 



158 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

the east coast of Asia Minor, nearly a thousand miles 
away. Furthermore, this was the time of Roman rule, 
and upon every land and people that the Romans con- 
quered they imposed, not only their laws, but also 
their mode of reckoning time. Now, from their earliest 
history, the Romans began the day at midnight. At 
this visit of Paul to Troas, the west coast of Asia Minor 
had been in their possession for one hundred and 
eighty years." — Saturday or Sunday, p. 14, (Quoted by 
Canright, Seventh-day Adventism Renounced, p. 205). 

Prof. Hackett, on Acts 20:7 has this to 
say: — 

"As Luke has mingled so much with foreign na- 
tions and was writing for Gentile readers, he would be 
very apt to designate the time in accordance with their 
practice; so that his evening or night of the first-day of 
the week would be the end of the Christian Sabbath, 
and the morning of his departure that of Monday." 
(Quoted from Canright as above.) 

Acts of Apostles is addressed to Theo- 
philus (Acts 1:1). Barnes in com men ting* on 
Lu. 1:3, where the same party is mentioned, 
says: — 

"It is probable that he was some distinguished 
Roman or Greek." 

Prof. W. M. Ramsay says of Theophilus: — 

"It has an important bearing on Luke's attitude to 
the Roman state that his work is addressed to a Roman 
officer who had become a Christian." (Studies in Acts 
(Lhamon), p. 301, 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 159 

The book of Acts was then addressed to 
a Gentile. All the facts construed together 
make it almost certain that Luke uses Roman 
time in his historical narrative. That being true 
the meeting at Troas was on Sunday evening. 



Sect. 68, In this section we give quota- 
tions from a few Commentators upon Acts 
20:7. 

1. Olshausen. 

"It presents an example of a meeting by night, 
and, secondly, because it shows that the observance of 
Sunday existed as early as the times of the Apostles, 
which is also proved by 1 Cor. 16:2. The connection 
plainly leads to this conclusion, that the apostle wish- 
ed to observe Sunday with the church, and to celebrate 
the Lord's supper, as also the agape with them, before 
he left Troas. The most natuial supposition is, that 
from the very commencement of the church, believers 
distinguished the day of our Lord's resurrection, and 
celebrated it with solemn meetings." 

2. The Pulpit Commentary. 

"This is an important evidence of the keeping of 
the Lord's day by the Church as a day for their church 
assemblies." 

3. Mathew Henry. 

"They came together upon the first-day of the week, 
which they called the Lord's day, (Rev. 1:10)." 



160 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

''This is here said to be the day when the disciples 
came together, that is, when it was their practice to 
come together in all the churches." 

4. Jamieson, Faussott & Brown. 

"This, compared with 1 Cor. 16:2, and other simi- 
lar allusions, plainly indicates that the Christian obser- 
vance of the day afterwards distinctly called 'the Lord's 
day,' was already a fixed practice of the churches." 

5. Life and Epi sties of St. Paul, by Cony- 
beare & Howson, p. 626. 

''The first-day of the week, v. 7, This is a passage 
of the utmost importance, as showing that the obser- 
vance of Sunday was customary." 

6. Barnes. 

" And upon the jirst day of the week. Showing thus 
that this clay was then observed by Christians as holy 
time. Comp. 1 Cor. 16:2; Rev. 1:10." (Dungan's Sab- 
bath or Lord's day, p, 64). 

7. Alford. Quoted from Clarkeon Acts 20:7. 
"We have here an intimation of the continuance of 

the practice, which seems to have begun immediately 
after the resurrection, of assembling on the first-day of 
the week for religious purposes." 



Sect. 69. It is generally conceded that 
the primitive church observed the Lord's 
Supper every Sunday. This being true, there 
must have been a meeting of the church each 
first-day of the week, and if so, that day was 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 161 

unquestionably the Lord's day of the New- 
Testament. We quote a number of witnesses 
upon the frequency of the observance of the 
holy communion in the early church. 

1. Albert Barnes in his comments on Acts 
20:7 says:— 

"It is probable that the Apostles and early Chris- 
tians celebrated the Lord's Supper on every Lord's 
day." (Dungan's Sabbath or Lord's day, p. 64). 

2. Scott, Commentary on Acts 20:7: — 

"Breaking of bread, or, commemorating the death 
of Christ in the eucharist, was one chief end of their as- 
sembling; this ordinance seems to have been constant- 
ly administered every Lord's day." (Dungan's Sab- 
bath or Lord's day, p. 63) 

3. Dr. Mason. Lectures on Frequent Com- 
munion, Edinburgh edition, quoted by 
Dungan in Sabbath or Lord's day, pp. 63- 
64, says: — 

"Communion every Lord's day was universal, and 
was preserved in the Greek church till the seventh 
century; and such as neglected three weeks together 
were excommunicated." 

4. Adam Clarke. Comment on Acts 20:7: — 
"To break bread. Intimating by this, that they 

were accustomed to receive the holy sacran ent on each 
Lord's day." 

5. Matthew Henry. Comment on Acts 20:7: — 
' 'In the primitive times it was the custom of many 

churches to receive the Lord's Supper every Lord's 
day." 



162 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

6. Kitto's Cy. of Biblical Literature, Article, 
Supper of the Lord. 

"The early church appears, from a vast prepon- 
derance of evidence, to have practiced communion 
weekly, on the Lord's day." 

7. Schaff-Herzog Ency., Article, Lord's Sup- 

per. 

"Originally the Communion was administered every 
day then every Sunday." 

8. Richard Watson in his Theological Insti- 
tutes, Vol. 2, p. 670, says of the Supper: — 

1 'The early Christians observed it every Sabbath." 

9. Doddridge. (Waggoner & Vogel Debate, 
page 108.) 

•'It is well known that the primitive Christians ad- 
ministered the Eucharist every Lord's day." 

10. Dr. J. M. Cramp, Pres. Arcadia College, 
(W. & G. Debate, p. 108). 

"It is well known [that the Lord's Supper] was 
observed by the primitive churches every Lord's day. " 

We might add indefinitely to this testi- 
mony, but it would be useless. It is a thing 
established and made out beyond all possibil- 
ity of successful contradiction that the prim- 
itive church observed the Supper each first 
day of the week. Acts 20:7 does, then, un- 
questionably ppint to a well established cus- 
tom. The churches regularly met upon that 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 163 

day and so Paul ordered the collections taken 
then that there might be no necessity of tak- 
ing any collection upon his arrival at Corinth 
(1 Cor. 16:2), and the "Lord's day" of Rev. 1:- 
10 can refer to no other time than the day 
upon which the church regularly met for di- 
vine worship — and this was the first day of 
the week. 

Upon the question of the frequency of 
the communion see also the following Sections, 
35 a, 44. 



Sect. 70. Acts 20:7, Murdoek's transla- 
tion of the Syriac reads: — 

"And on the first day of the week, when 
we assembled to break the encharist, Paul 
discoursed with them, because he was to de- 
part the next day; and he continued his dis- 
course till midnight." 



Sect. 71. "Oh" but says the Sabbatar- 
ian, "Luke does not call the first-day of the 
week the Lord's day." What of it? Where 
a day has several different names or designa- 
tions it is not necessary to use all of them in 
each case where that day is refered to. At 



164 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

the present time our usual day for public 
worship is popularily known by at least three 
different styles — 1 — First day of the week — 
2— Sunday— 3 — Lord's day. When a writer 
speaks of that day is it essential that he use all 
these terms? No, any one of the three terms 
is sufficient. If a minister writes a report of 
a service for the church paper is it necessary 
for him to say that said service took place 
"on the first-day of the week which is Sunday 
which is the Lord's day?" No one but a fool 
would so write — and yet this seems to be 
about what Sabbatarians think the New Tes- 
tament writers should have done. In the 
New Testament period the same three terms 
were applied to the day set apart for the pub- 
lic assemblies as are now applied to that day, 
although in the New Testament no use is made 
of the term "Sunday." Then, as now, the 
signification of these various terms was well un- 
derstood by Christians and when the day was re- 
ferred to by any one of these three designations 
that was sufficient. The fact that a Christian 
writer of today may refer to the day of pub- 
lic worship merely by the designation "first- 
day of the week" does not indicate that the 
said writer does not regard that day as the 
"Lord's day". Or, if an author uses the 
term "Sunday," does that prove that he does 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 165 

not nevertheless regard that day as the 
"Lord's day?" And when Luke in Acts 20:7 
points out the day simply by the expression 
"first day of the week," neither does that in 
any manner indicate that the day was not at 
the same time regarded by himasthe"Lord's- 
day." When John uses the designation 
1 'Lord's day" it would have been superflous 
and childish for him to have added, "which is 
Sunday which is the first-day of the week 
which is the next day after Saturday and 
which is the day before Monday," etc., etc., 
and yet some such a description as that is 
about what Sabbatarians seem to think would 
have been necessary in order to designate 
Sunday. The name that John used was a suf- 
ficient pointing out of the day and therefore 
he added no more. John used the term u he 
kuriake hemera" without defining the term, 
but Sabbatarians are dead sure that he meant 
the Sabbath. No scripture says so, nor ap- 
aplies that term to the seventh day of the 
week, nevertheless Sabbatarians are as cer- 
tain that he meant Saturday as they are that 
Mrs. White's visions (fifteen or twenty vol- 
umes altogether) are revelations from God 
and of equal authority with the Bible. Still, 
because John does not stop and say by "he ku- 
riake hemera," he meant Sunday, Sabbatarians 



166 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

conclude that we cannot know that such was 
in fact the case. Our opponents should re- 
member that what is sauce for the goose is 
also sauce for the gander, and that if they 
may know, without evidence or proof, that 
John meant Saturday, much more can we, 
with a vast array of documentary evidence at 
hand be sure that he meant Sunday. 



Chapter IX, 



TWO FIRST DAY MEETINGS. 

John 20:19-26. 19. When therefore it 
was evening, on that day, the first-day of the 
week, and when the doors were shut where 
the disciples were, for fear of the Jews, Jesus 
came and stood in the midst, and saith unto 
them, Peace be unto you. 20. And when he 
had said this, he shewed unto them his hands 
and his side. The disciples therefore were 
glad, when they saw the Lord. 21. Jesus 
therefore said to them again, Peace be unto 
you: as the father hath sent me, even so send 



168 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

I you. 22. And when he had said this, he 
breathed on them, and saith unto them, Re- 
ceive ye the Holy Ghost: 23. Whose soever 
sins ye forgive, they are forgiven unto them; 
whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained. 
24. But Thomas, one of the twelve, called 
Didymus, was not with them when Jesus 
came. 25. The other disciples therefore 
said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he 
said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands 
the print of the nails, and put my finger into 
the print of the nails, and put my hand into 
his side, I will not believe. 26. And after 
eight dsijs again his disciples were within, and 
Thomas with them. Jesus cometh, the doors 
being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, 
Peace be unto you. 



Sect. 72. On the day of his resurrection 
Jesus appeared to the disciples (verse 19 of 
foregoing quotation). This, as will perhaps 
be admitted by all, was the first-day of the 
week. Verse 26 of John 20: says that "after 
eight days" Jesus again appeared to the dis- 
ciples as they were assembled together. We 
undertake to prove that this second meeting 
was also on the first day of the week. 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 169 

"After eight days" carries us exactly 
from that first-day when Jesus arose and ap- 
peared to the disciples to the next Sunday. 
This may not seem clear at first. According 
to our method of counting days, "after eight 
days," would consume more than a week, but 
according to a peculiarity of the Hebrews in 
counting up time, "after eight days," is just 
one week, and this second meeting of the Sav- 
iour with the disciples was a Sunday meeting. 
With the Hebrew a part of a day ivas usually 
counted as a whole day. There was no -com- 
mand that time should be computed in that 
way. It was merely a peculiarity, apparently 
of their own adoption. And writers of the 
Old and New Testaments seem to have recog- 
nized and used this method. This peculiarity 
we expect to prove beyond all contradiction. 
First, let us see where "after eight days" 
will take us to, provided a partof a day is reck- 
oned as a whole day. The first meeting was 
on Sunday. No doubt a part, perhaps a small 
part only, but a part nevertheless, of that day 
remained after the meeting recorded in John 
20:19. This Sunday then would be one day. 
Monday, two; Tuesday, three; Wednesda3^, 
four; Thursday, five; Friday, six; Saturday, 
seven; Sunday eight; so that a meeting any 
time on Sunday would have been "after eight 
days." 



170 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

Now for the proof that this exceptional 
mode of computing time is the correct meth- 
od. The proofs are so abundant that space 
may foibid the giving of them all. 

1. Mark 8:31 — "And he began to teach 
them, that the Son of man must suffer many 
things, and be rejected by the elders, and the 
chief priests, and the scribes, and be killed 
and after three days rise again." 

Luke 9:22— "The Son of man must suffer 
many things, and be rejected of the elders 
and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, 
and the third day be raised up." 

In the first of these passages it is said 
that Jesus was to rise "after three days." In 
the second it is said he was to rise the "third 
day." The cardinal "three," and ordinal 
"third," were used by Bible writers inter- 
changeably. And "after three days" simply 
meant on the "third day" with New Testa- 
ment writers. Jesus was buried on Friday — 
late in the day, remained in the tomb all day 
Saturday, and rose early Sunday morning. He 
was in the tomb a part of Friday and a part of 
Sunday. But a part of a day is counted a 
whole day — and so we have — Friday, one day; 
Saturday, two; Sunday, three. Hence, it is 
said that he was to be raised "after three 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 171 

days." This rule applied to " after eight 
days," places the second meeting of Jesus 
with the disciples, on Sunday. It must be 
conceded that this scheme of computation is 
foreign to popular usage with us, but must 
nevertheless be recognized as haying been a 
reality with the New Testament writers. In 
both the foregoing passages the language is 
that of Jesus himself, and is moreover a re- 
port of the same conversation. 

2. Matt. 27:62-64— "Now on the morrow, 
which is the day after the Preparation, the 
chief priests and the Pharisees were gather- 
ed together unto Pilate, saying, Sir, we re- 
member that that deceiver said, while he was 
yet alive, After three days I rise again. Com- 
mand therefore that the sepulchre be made 
sure until the third day, lest haply his disci- 
ples come and steal him away." "After three 
days" and the "third day" here mean exactly 
the same, and the day on which Jesus was 
buried is counted one day and the day of his 
resurrection is counted as one day. Applying 
this rule, and counting the day of Jesus' first 
meeting with his disciples (John 20.° 9) as one 
day and the day of the second meeting (John 
20:26) as one day, "after eight days" takes us 
just to the first Sunday following Jesus 7 res- 
urrection. 



172 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

3. This same scheme is used in the Acts 
of Apostles. We quote from Acts 10:3. "He 
saw in a vision openly, as it were about the 
ninth hour of the day," etc. This was late in 
the day, the ninth hour, about three o'clock, 
yet this fraction of a day must be counted as 
a whole day in order to make this whole pas- 
sage hang together. We read further, verse 
9. "Now on the morrow, as they were on 
their journey," etc. Here is the second day, 
or two days as a New Testament writer would 
say. Verse 23 — "And on the morrow he arose 
and went forth with them," etc. Here is the 
third day v or three days. Verse 24 — "And on 
the morrow they entered into Caesarea," etc. 
Here is the fourth day, or four days. And on 
this day Cornelius said (verse 30), "Four days 
ago, until this hour, I was keeping the ninth 
hour of prayer in my house," etc. 

According to our computation of time only 
three full days had elapsed, but in the New 
Testament age the fraction of the first day 
and the fraction of the fourth day were each 
counted as a full day — and hence Cornelius 
said, "Four days ago." 

It would hardly seem necessary to argue 
this point further. For the benefit of doubt- 
ers and for the use of debaters w T e will how- 
ever refer to a number of other passages 
where the same rule is exemplified. 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 173 

In Gen. 42:16-18, "three days" and "third 
day" are used as equivalents. The same is 
true in 1 Kings 12:5,12. Also see Esther 4:- 
15 to 5:1. And by reference to Gen. 17:12, 
Lev. 12:3, and Luke 1;59 it will be seen that 
"eight days old" simply means on the "eighth 
day" of life. 

In Hebrew history a part of a year was 
usually counted as a whole year, just as we 
have found a fraction of a day counted as a 
whole day. This results in some peculiar 
statements. For instance it is said (1 Kings 
15:1-9) that Abijam began to reign over Judah 
In the eighteenth year of Jeroboam — that he 
reigned three years and "slept with his fath- 
ers" — and that Asa his son succeeded him up- 
on the throne in the twentieth vear of Jero- 
boam. But how can we get three years in be- 
tween the eighteenth and twentieth year's of 
Jeroboam? Only this way — the fraction of 
the eighteenth year of Jeroboam during which 
Abijam reigned is counted one year — the nine- 
teenth year of Jeroboam is counted one year — 
and the fraction of the twentieth year of Jero- 
boam during which Abijam reigned before his 
death is counted one year — making the three 
years. Nadab ascended the throne of Israel 
in the second year of Asa — reigned two years^ 



174 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

and yet we are told that he was killed in the 
third year of Asa (1 Kings 15:25-28). The 
fraction of Asa's second year and the fraction 
of Asa's third year are each counted as a year 
— making the two years. Baasha began his 
reign in the third year of Asa (1 Kings 15:33), 
reigned twenty-four years, and yet died in the 
twenty-sixth year of Asa (1 Kings 16:6,8). 

When we remember that it was the rule 
to count fractions of days and years as whole 
days and years the foregoing is plain enough. 
Elah began to reign over Israel in the twenty- 
sixth year of Asa, reigned two years, and yet 
was killed in the twenty- seventh year of Asa 
(1 Kings 16:8-10). Here we have the same old 
story of a fraction of a year counted as though 
it were a whole year. This method seems to 
have been a well settled rule among Bible 
writers. Applying it to the case in hand it 
becomes a mathematical demonstration that 
the meeting u after eight days" of John 20:26 
could have been on no other day than Sunday. 



Sect. 73. Biblical scholars very gener- 
ally admit that this second appearance of Je- 
sus and meeting with his disciples was on 
Sunday. We shall quote a few. 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 175 

1. Barnes. 

I ' And after eight days. That is, on the return of the 
first- day of the week." 

2. Matthew Henry. 

II After eight days; that day seven-night after he rose 
which must therefore be, as that was> the first-day of 
the week." 

3. Jamie son, Fausset & Brown. 

11 And after eight days — * * Their Lord designedly 
reserved His second appearance amongst them till the 
recurrence of his resurrection day." 

4. Hanna's Life of Christ, pp. 816-817. 
"Seven days go past, and the Apostles are once 

more gathered together on the evening of the second 
first-day of the week * * * They have not sat long 
when again, in the very same way in which he had 
come before, Jesus enters and stands before them." 

5. Whedon. (Beardsley on The True Sab- 
bath, p. 101). 

•'After eight days — The Sunday after the Sunday 
of the resurrection. " 

Many other authorities might be quoted, 
but so far as -known to us there is general 
agreement among all reputable scholars with 
the quotations already given. 



Sect. 74. By reference to Sect's. 12, 17, 
19, 23 and 24 it will be noted that "eighth day" 
became a common name for Sunday in the ear- 



176 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

ly church. Why should Sunday be called the 
"eighth day V It was in fact the first-day of 
the week. There is one explanation at least 
that" seems to throw light on this matter. As 
we have proven, "after eight days," (Jno. 20: 
26) had reference to Sunday. The early writ- 
ers of the church all understood this, and in- 
asmuch as an inspired Apostle had set the ex- 
ampleof pointingout Sunday by use of the term 
"eight" it seems that the writers of the early 
church followed in the path marked out by 
him, and hence we find Sunday very general- 
ly designated as the "eighth day." This may 
explain the use of the term by Augustine, Cy- 
prian, Tertullian, the Epistle of Barnabas, 
and Justin Martyr (See Sections 12, 17, 19, 23 
and 24.) 



Sect. 75. Sabbatarians attempt to break 
the force of our argument on this point by 
quoting Mark 9:2 in connection with Lu. 9:28. 
In speaking of the same period of time, Mark 
says "after six days," and Luke says "about 
eight days after." They contend that "after 
six days" is a variable quantity and means 
about eight days, and that likewise "after 
eight days" is uncertain and means about ten 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 177 

days. If we are allowed to play fast and loose 
with language in that style then all definite- 
ness of expression is at an end — and no man 
can tell what another means when he u&.es 
words. "After six days" as used by Mark 
has a fixed definite meaning. Luke does not 
pretend to be definite. He only claims to be 
somewhere Dear the exact time. To say 
"about eight days" is in the neighborhood of the 
exact time. Mark is exact in his statement. 
But because Luke indefinitely designates the 
time by the expression "about eight days," 
shall we therefore conclude that Mark's clear 
and exact statement of the time "after six 
days," is indefinite and uncertain, and that 
therefore "after eight eight days" (Jno. 20: 
26) is also indefinite and uncertain? If such is 
to be our conclusion then every expression 
pointing out a certain number of days or 
years is uncertain and indefinite. When Je- 
sus said that he would rise "after three 
days," this according to the followers of El- 
len White does not mean what it says at all — 
it means we suppose that Jesus would rise af- 
ter about five days//// Such puerility is not 
deserving serious attention, and one could 
have no patience to notice it, but for the fact 
that many are being deceived by such dishon- 
est quibbling. "After six days" is a definite 



178 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

statement of a definite time and "after eight 
days" is likewise a statement of no uncertain 
period. To illustrate: Suppose A says that 
A and B met on a certain day and twenty days 
later had a second meeting — suppose now that 
C and D meet on a certain day and afterwards 
meet a second time — E says that the second 
meeting of C. and D. was twelve day s after the 
first meeting. He makes a definite statement of 
the time. F. says that the second meeting of 
C. and D. was about fourteen days after the 
first meeting, Notice F. does not pretend to 
be exact. Now for a little Adventist wisdom 
— "Twelve days after" is a variable and uncer- 
tain quantity and means about "fourteen" 
days — and therefore A's twenty days is an 
uncertain quantity and means about twenty- 
two days — and the legitimate outcome of such 
juvenile antics would be the conclusion that 
there is no way by which to express a certain 
and definite number of days. F. does not 
pretend to be definite and no man with an 
ounce of brains would permit F's loose state- 
ment to unsettle or cast a doubt over the de- 
finite statements of E. and A. And no man 
capable of reasoning would presume to allow 
the indefinite statement of Luke to render un- 
certain the definite statements of Mark and 
John. 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 179 

Sect. 75. (a) It is also thought by Sab- 
batarians that " 'after seven days" (1 Chron. 9: 
25) is the proper expression for a week. Con- 
cerning that passage we call attention to the 
fact that the R. V. reads "every" instead of 
"after" as in the A. V. 

Of this passage Peter Vogel says: — 
"The Hebrew of 1 Chron. 9:25 is peculiar; it liter- 
ally reads, l for or against the seven of days.' Where 
we have after in the Common Version, the Hebrew has 
lamed, for or against] the Greek kata, on; the Douay 
Version, upon; and Luther, the genitive, i. e.. on; — 
thus making it different from Jno. 20:26, where the 
Greek has meto." (Waggoner & Vogel Debate, p. 126,) 

We bring these facts before the reader to 
show that the original of 1 Chron. 9:25 is en- 
tirely different from Jno. 20:26 and can there- 
fore have no bearing upon the computation al 
ready made as to the date of that meeting. 



Sect. 76. It is a remarkable fact and one 
which may not be cast aside without some 
consideration at least, that the only visits of 
Jesus with his disciples after his resurrec- 
tion, the exact dates of which are pointed out, 
were on Sunday. Adventists profess to be- 
lieve that this fact amounts to nothing, and 
try to make light of the matter, But some of 



180 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

them feel the weight of this evidence and try 
to crawl from under it by denying the scrip- 
tures. 

Here is the dodge of Andrews in his His- 
tory of the Sabbath, p. 150: — 

"The first meeting of Jesus with his disciples in 
the evening at the close of [the] first-day of the week, 
was mainly, if not wholly upon the second day of the 
week," 

In a footnote on the preceeding page he 
says: — 

"It could, therefore, have lacked but little of sun- 
set, which closed the day, if it was not actually upon 
the second day, when Jesus came into their midst." 

The New Testament says (Jno. 20:19) in 
just so many words that this meeting was on 
the Urst-day of the week and that it was on 
that day that Jesus appeared to his disciples. 
But Adventists say that Jesus' appearance 
may have been "actually upon the second 
day" — and that notwithstanding the state- 
ment of John the Inspired that this meeting 
was upon the first-da}' of the week (Jno. 20:19) 
they say it may have been "wholly upon the 
second day of the week." Such infidelity 
ought to be kicked out of our pulpits. When 
the Bible does not suit a Sabbatarian, he cool- 
ly assumes the Bible writer to have been mis- 
taken. No doubt Adventists have learned 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 181 

this trick from their inspired leader, Mrs. 
White. If this first meeting' was on the se- 
cond day of the week, then the second meet- 
ing "after eight days" was also on Monday. 
Therefore, in order to get both meetings 
shoved off until Monday, Sabbatarians adopt 
the bold alternative of denying the correct- 
ness of the statement of John the Apostle! 
The issue is a clean cut one — Will we believe 
the Bible or the contrary statement of infi- 
dels? Andrews saw, what every careful 
reader must see, that the meeting recorded in 
Jno. 20:19 must have been after sundown. 
(See Sect. 66.) This fact he could not har- 
monize with his theory that the first-day end- 
ed at sundown, and rather than give up his 
pet theory on that point, he denies the cor- 
rectness of the statement of John by suggest- 
ing that the meeting was on the second day 
of the week. Here is the solution of the mat- 
ter: The meeting was after sundown. Yet 
it was the first-day of the week — for John 
says so, and we dare not dispute him. John 
reckoned the day from midnight to midnight 
according to the Roman method — so that the 
meeting was after sundown and still on the 
first-day of the week. This solves the pro- 
blem without becoming an infidel. If this re- 
peated meeting of Jesus with the disciples on 



182 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

Sunday proves nothing, why do Adventists 
go to the extreme of disputing the New Tes- 
tament itself in order to try to convince the 
world that no meeting was held on that day? 
As to whether these facts are worth consider- 
ing the reader must judge for himself. 



Chapter X, 



SUNDAY AND THE ROMAN CATHOLICS. 

Sect. 77. Adventists never get through 
telling about the Catholic church changiDg the 
Sabbath. There is among American Protes- 
tants a deep-seated abhorence of everything 
that pertains to Catholicism. Once succeed 
in convincing a Protestant that Sunday obser- 
vance is the offspring of the papacy and he is 
about ready to turn to Sabbath observance. 
If Home did change the Sabbath as Adven- 
tists claim, then there must have been a time 
and a place where the change occurred. In 
debate after debate we have urged our oppo- 



184 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

nent to write down the year and the name of the 
place, when and where the Catholic church 
changed the day of worship from Saturday to 
Sunday — and we have never yet found a man 
who had the courage to settle down on a date 
and a place and say — "This is the year and 
place where Rome changed the Sabbath." In 
their lectures they make all sorts of claims 
and pretend to find all kinds of history on 
this point, but in debate with an opponent 
who means business they do not believe in re- 
ferring to history to prove anything. Some- 
how a debate seems to have the effect of sud- 
denly turning all the historians into unrelia- 
bles and knaves — from the Sabbatarian stand- 
point at least. In some of their lectures they 
name the Council of Laodicea, A. D. 364 as the 
place and time where Rome changed the Sab- 
bath. But this claim is false, for we have al- 
ready, by historical authority that cannot be 
doubted, traced Sunday observance back to 
and into the Apostolic age — three hundred 
years before the Council of Laodicea met. In 
public debate they do not dare to name a date 
and place, for they know that the first-day ad- 
vocate could easily prove the observance of 
Sunday hundreds of years before any date 
they dare to set. It is one of the cardinal 
doctrines of the Adventist church that Sun- 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 185 

day keeping* is the Mark of the Beast (Rev. 14: 
9-11); and that the Beast is Roman Catholi- 
cism. 

Uriah Smith in Thoughts on the Revela- 
tion, p. 602 says: — 

"This change of the fourth commandment must 
therefore be the change to which the prophecy points, 
and Sunday-keeping must be the mark of the beast." 

J. N. Andrews in a tract, The Third Mes- 
sage of Rev. 14: says, 

"But when we profane the Lord's Sabbath, and ob- 
serve in its stead the Romish festival of Sunday, we ac- 
knowledge the papacy above God, and able to change 
his times and laws." 

Mrs. White has set the seal of inspiration 
to this claim. We quote from the Great Con- 
troversy between Christ and Satan, p. 281. — 

"The change of the Sabbath is the sign, or mark, of 
the authority of the Romish church. " 

Also p. 57. 

"The observance of Sunday as a Christian institu- 
tion has its origin in that 'mystery of lawlessness 
which even in Paul's day, had begun its work. Where 
and when did the Lord adopt this child of the papacy?" 

In the Appendix, p. 505 she says: — : 

"The sign or seal of God is his Sabbath, and the 
seal or mark of the beast is in direct opposition to it; it 
is a counterfeit Sabbath on the 'day of the sun. r " 



186 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

The logical conclusion from the fore- 
going would seem to be that all who observe 
Sunday have the mark of the beast. Adven- 
tists repudiate this conclusion and yet cling 
to the premises involving it. 

It is customary for Sabbatarians to quote 
from Catholic authors claiming that Rome 
did really change the day of worship. They 
seek to create the impression that the Rom- 
ish church claims that it did this several hun- 
dred years after the Apostolic age. In this 
they misrepresent the real teaching of the 
Catholic church. All that the Catholic church 
claims is that the church made the change of 
days, from Saturday to Sunday, in and during 
the Apostolic age itself. We will prove this;— 

1. There is lying before us a copy of the 
Bible, Douay version. This is an English trans- 
lation of the Bible published by authority of 
the Catholic church and for the use of English 
speaking Catholics. It contains footnote ex- 
planations of the text. These are to guard 
the minds of the faithful from error. UDder 
Acts 20:7 we find this explanation — 

"And on the flrst-day of the toeek. Here St. Chrysos- 
tom, with n any other interpreters of the scripture ex_ 
plain, that the Christians, even at this time, must have 
changed the Sabbath into the first-day of the week, (the 
Lord's day) as all Christians now keep it; this 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 187 

change was undoubtedly made by the authority of the 
church;" etc. 

So, after all, the claim of the Catholic 
church dwindles down into the statement that 
the church made the change in the age of the 
Apostles and under their eyes. If Sunday 
observance began, as the Catholics really 
teach, in the New Testament period, and un- 
der the eyes of the Apostles, then what be- 
comes of Seventh- day Adventism? 

2. We next present evidence from A 
Catholic Dictionary, by Addis & Arnold, Arti- 
cle, Sunday. 

"Sunday is merely of ecclesiastical institution, 
dating, however, from the time of the Apostles. Such 
is the opinion of St. Thomas and of the greatest Catho- 
lic theologians." 

It is true Rome claims the church to have 
instituted Sunday observance, but when it is 
considered that she claims that Sunday obser- 
vance arose also in the Apostolic period, her 
claim does not in the least substantiate Sev- 
day -Adventism, but is, in reality, all adverse 
to it, and favorable to the Apostolic origin of 
first-day observance. 

3. On Dec. 8, 1890, the author addresed 
the following question to the Rev. Thos. Dul- 
lard, Roman Catholic priest at Rock Rapids, 



188 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

Iowa: — "When does the Roman Catholic 
church hold that the observance of the first- 
day of the week, as the Lord's day, began in 
the church?" Under date of Dec. 10, 1890, the 
gentleman addressed replied, a part of which 
reply we now quote: — 

"The council of Laodicea did not originate Sunday 
as a day of worship on its own accord, for we see in 
Acts of Apostles the Christians assembled on the first- 
day of the week. * * * The Apostles and their imme- 
diate successors confirmed this custom which was 
handed down through the first 366 [years ] " 

Seventh-day Adventists try to make out 
that it was at Laodicea, A. D. 364, that the 
Pope changed the Sabbath, but all Catholics 
admit when fairly heard that Sunday obser- 
vance did not originate there, but that the ac- 
tion of that council was only confirmatory of a 
practice that had come down from the Apos- 
tolic age. 

4 . Under date of Dec. 28, 1890, the author 
addressed to the Rev. Joseph B. Hummert, 
Catholic Priest at Earling, Towa, the same 
question previously addressed to Mr. Dullard 
Under date of Dec. 31, 1890, Mr. Hummert 
replied, a portion of which we now quote: — 

"Passages of the Bible, Acts 20:7 and 1 Cor. 16:2 
hint to us very strongly that Sunday or the first-day 
of the week was observed by the Apostles as the Lord's 
day. The teaching of the Catholic church on this 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 189 

point is however based principally on tradition or the 
church's history, the writings of the first fathers of the 
church, who say, that this change was made by the 
Apostles at the wish of Christ." 

The reader may rest assured that wher- 
ever the testimony of the Catholic church is 
fairly heard on this point that it is directly 
subversive of Sabbatarianism, always declar- 
ing the Apostolic origin of first-day obser- 
vance. And if Sunda}^ observance arose in 
the Apostolic age, is not that the very time and 
place it ought to have arisen to command our 
respect and obedience? 

5. "Who changed the Sabbath" is the ti- 
tle of a Sabbatarian tract in which may be 
found the following, quoted from the "Catho- 
lic Christian instructed." 

' Ques. What warrant have you for keeping the 
Sunday, preferable to the ancient Sabbath, which was 
the Saturday? 

Ans. We have for it the authority of the Catholic 
church, and apostolic tradition.'' 

This quotation is the best that Adventists 
can find to support their theor}^ and it is 
against them, for it refers the matter to 
"apostolic tradition" — virtually saying that 
Sunday observance was from the Apostolic 
age. There is not one respectable historian 
in all the world who says that Rome changed 
the Sabbath. 



190 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

Sect. 78. Again, the papacy did not 
change the Sabbath before it was established. 
When was the papacy established? Upon this 
point let us hear that eminent Seventh-day 
Adventist, Uriah Smith. In his Thoughts on 
the Revelation, p. 524-525 he deposes: — 

"And the church fled into the wilderness at the 
time the papacy was established, in 538, where it was 
nourished by the word of God and the ministration of an- 
gels during the long, dark, and bloody rule of that 
power, 1260 years." 

Mrs. -White calls Sunday observance the 
"child of the papacy/' Children are not usu- 
ally born before their parents, and there- 
fore Sunday observance must have originated 
this side of A. D. 538, the year when the pa- 
pacy was established. But we have hereto- 
fore traced Sunday observance back to the 
first century. The observance of Sunday 
may be traced four or five hundred years 
earlier than the papacy had an existence — 
and yet Sunday is the "child of the papacy! ! ! 
When grand-children are born before their 
grand-parents, then we may accept Seventh- 
day Adventist history — but not before. 



Chapter XL 



CONSTANTINE AND SUNDAY. 

Sect. 79. It is no uncommon thing for 
Sabbatarians to claim that Sunday observance 
had its origin with the Emperor Constantine. 
It will be noticed by any- careful reader that 
Adventists do all kinds of twisting and turn- 
ing upon the question of the time and place 
where the day of worship was changed. At 
one time the change was made at Laodicea in 
364, at another time by Constantine in 321, and 
so on. Perhaps the object in having so many 
conflicting positions is, that they may always 



192 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

have some place to which to retreat in case of 
disaster. Well, what about Constantine? He 
was a Roman Emperor from 306 to 337. In 
the year 321 he issued an imperial edict as 
follows: — 

''Let all the judges and town people, and the occu- 
pation of all trades rest on the venerable day of the 
sun; but let those who are situated in the country, free- 
ly and at full liberty attend to the business of agricul- 
ture; because it often happens that no other day is so 
fit for sowing corn and planting vines; lest, the critical 
moment being let slip, men should lose the commodi- 
ties granted by heaven. Given the seventh-day of 
March; Crispus and Constantine being consuls, each of 
them for the second time." (Andrews Hist. Sabbath, 
p. 343. 

And upon the reading of this the Sabbat- 
arian enthusiast exultantly exclaims — "Here 
it is — the first Sunday law!" And if the Sab- 
batarian is lecturing it will most likely be 
claimed that this edict was the beginning of 
Sunday observance. Yes, Constantine made 
a Sunday law, but what of it? The legislature 
of Iowa passed a Sunday law in the year 
1897. Here it is:— 

Code, Sect. 5040. "If any person be found on the 
first day of the week, commonly called Sunday, en- 
gaged in carrying firearms, dancing, hunting, shooting, 
horse-racing, or in any manner disturbing a worship- 
ing assembly or private family, or in buying or selling 
property of any kind, or in any labor except that of ne- 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 193 

cessity or charity, he shall be fined not more than five 
nor less than one dollar, and be imprisoned in the 
county jail until the fine, with costs of prosecution, 
shall be paid; but nothing herein contained shall be 
construed to extend to those who conscientiously ob- 
serve the seventh day of the week as the Sabbath, or 
to prevent persons traveling or families emigrating, 
from pursuing their journey, or keepers of tell bridges 
toll gates and ferrymen from attending the same." 

The enacting of this law proves nothing 
as to when the observance of Sunday began. 
The legislature found about all the people in 
favor of such a law, believing in it and prac- 
ticing its principles already and therefore its 
passage. This was not our first Sunday law. 
But the first Sunday law of our state grew out 
of the fact that the prevailing sentiment of 
the people was already in favor of the law, 
and actually observing the day. The law fol- 
lowed the desire and practice of the people. 
The enactment simply put into statutory form 
a principle recognized by Christians for cen- 
turies in the past. So of the edict of Constan- 
tine. That did not mark the origin of Sunday 
observance. We have already traced Sunday 
observance to the Apostolic age, more than 
two hundred years before the edict of Con- 
stantine. Presumably it is safe to say that 
Constantine was not a Christian at the time of 
this edict. But he was Emperor and withal a 



194 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

shrewd politician. He saw that Christianity 
was the rising religion of the empire. It was 
evident to him that it possessed a power and 
vitality before which all other systems were 
destined to crumble. As a shrewd politician 
he determined to make the church his friend. 
He found all Christians already observing the 
first day of the week. What more natural 
than that he should make the observance of 
the day general and enforce that observance 
by law in order to conciliate and win the good- 
will of the most powerful religion of his em- 
pire? The law was subsequent to, and a con- 
sequence of, the general observance of the 
day by Christians, and not the reverse as 
claimed by Adventists. This is another case 
of the cart before the horse. See especially 
Sect. 47 on this point. 



Chapter XIL 



AN OBJECTION CONSIDERED. 

Sect. 80. Here is an argument, or suppos- 
ed to be one, which Sabbatarians usually re- 
sort to when all else fails. We quote from 
Discussion Notes, by W. B. Hill. (This is a 
lying report of a debate between the author 
and said Hill, held at Worthington, Minn., 
1891). 

P. 38. ,( No man can add to a covenant after it has 
been confirmed. Gal. 3:15. The new covenant was 
confirmed, or sealed by the blood of Christ. Matt, 26:- 
27-28. Therefore, as the Sunday institution had no ex- 
istence until after the new covenant was confirmed by 



196 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

the shedding of Christ's blood upon the cross, it can 
have no place in the new covenant. Mark it well. Sun- 
day keeping has every mark of a child of the papacy." 

(Of course, an argument would not be 
complete if it did not somewhere state that 
Sunday keeping is the "child of the papacy." 
Mother White has said it, and all her follow- 
ers dutifully repeat it in concert). First let 
us have the entire passage upon which Sabba- 
tarians base the contention now before us. 

Gal. 3:15-19. "Brethren, I speak after 
the manner of men: Though it be but a man's 
covenant, yet when it hath been confirmed, 
no one maketh it void, or addeth thereto. Now 
to Abraham were the promises spoken, and to 
hi? seed. Be saith not. And to seeds, as of 
many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which 
is Christ. Now this I say; A covenant con- 
firmed beforehand of God, the law, which 
came four hundred and thirty years after, 
doth not disannul, so as to make the promise of 
none effect. For if the inheritance is of the 
law, it is no more of promise: but God hath 
granted it to Abraham by promise. What then 
is the law? It was added because of trans- 
gressions, till the seed should come to whom 
the promise hath been made." 

This very passage of scripture fully quo- 
ted defeats the Adventist argument. The 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 197 

covenant or promise was made with Abraham, 
and was confirmed. Four hundred and thirty 
years later the law was added. Here was 
something actually added after the covenant 
was confirmed. But, Paul says, nothing could 
be added that would invalidate or make void 
the covenant. So in the case in hand. Laws 
might be given and institutions established 
after the shedding of Christ's blood, provided 
always, that they be of such a nature as not 
to disannul the covenant of Christ. 

What is popularly known as Christian 
baptism is a case in hand. Baptism into the 
name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit was 
never even commanded, so far as we know, 
until the great commission (Matt. 28:19) but 
this was after the shedding of Christ's blood. 
According to Seventh- day Adventist logic to 
be baptized is no part of our duty, because no 
part of the covenant or law of Christ, because 
not instituted until after the shedding of 
Christ's blood. But a]l the world knows bet- 
ter than that. The observance of Sunday is 
not an institution that could in any way inval- 
idate the covenant of Christ and therefore 
may properly have been established at any 
time during the Apostolic age. Such an in- 
stitution would in fact be in furtherance of 
the covenant, inasmuch as it would be a week- 



198 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

ly festival commemorating the resurrection, 
one of the great fundamental facts of the new 
covenant, and would in itself become a monu- 
mental evidence of the truthfulness of the 
gospel. There can then be no reason why 
Sunday observance may not properly have 
arisen in the church under Apostolic direc- 
tion at any time after the church's establish- 
ment. 

Still further, Jesus no doubt taught the 
disciples before his death many things not re- 
corded in the gospels. The gospels contain 
but a very abbreviated record of the teaching 
of Jesus prior to his death. For aught we 
know, and for aught any Adventist can ever 
discover, (unless Ellen White's inspiration be 
drawn upon), Jesus may, before his death. 
have given to the disciples explicit instruc- 
tions in regard to the establishment of the 
first-day of the week as the "Lord's day." It 
cannot be proven that he did not do this, and 
so long as that remains a fact, the Adventist 
argument would be a doubtful one, provided 
it were sound in other respects, but we have 
found that the scripture cited (Gal. 3 : 15) 
when fully considered teaches the exact oppo- 
site of what Adventists claim. Agaid, Jesus 
expressly teaches that he had not, and would 
not, prior to his death, fully reveal to the dis- 
ciples his will. 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 199 

John 16:12-13 sa}^s. "I have yet many 
things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them 
now. Howbeit when he, the spirit of truth, is 
come, he shall guide you into all the truth:'''' etc. 

The "Spirit of truth" came as here prom- 
ised, on the day of Pentecost, (see Acts 2:), 
fully fifty days after the feast at which Jesus 
was crucified. Therefore we learn that it was 
the deliberate purpose of Jesus to reveal 
"many things* to his disciples after he had 
shed his blood upon the cross. The establish- 
ment of the first-day of the week as the 
"Lord's day" may have been one of these 
things thus revealed and ordained by the 
Spirit. We do not say that such was the case. 
We have already pointed out two meetings of 
Jesus with his disciples upon Sunday, occur- 
ring previous even to the Pentecost. The 
Adventist position upon this point flatly con- 
tradicts the express statement of Jesus and 
must therefore be rejected. No matter when 
Sunday observance arose — if it was during 
the Apostolic age and with Apostolic sanction 
it is sufficient. 



Chapter XIII, 



SEVENTH-DAY ADVENT1ST HISTOKIANS. 

Sect. 81. In their literature and in their 
lectures Seventh-day Adventists quote from a 
number of writers whom they profess to es- 
teem as eminent and reliable historians. It 
would exceed the compass of this volume to 
attempt a biography of all their so-called "au- 
thorities." It will be our purpose however 
to look into the records of a few of their au- 
thorities. Sufficient wi]l be brought out to 
show how little weight is to be attached to any 
of their historical quotations. Incidentally the 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 201 

utter incapability of Sabbatarian authors and 
preachers to deal candidly with their readers 
and hearers will be demonstrated. 



Sect. 82. In Andrew's Hist, of the Sab- 
bath, one u Morer"is quoted as many as forty- 
five times, one quotation containing twenty- 
eight and one-half lines. He is referred to as 
"the learned Morer." Upon reading Mr. An- 
drew's book and encountering so large an 
amount of matter quoted from this man Mor- 
er, our curiosity was excited to learn more of 
this "learned" author. We were foolish 
enough to suppose that certainly something 
would be said of him in some of the Encyclo- 
paedias. We therefore looked for his biogra- 
phy under the head of "Morer" in the follow- 
ing Encyclopaedias: 1. Britannica. 2. M'- 
Clintock & Strong. 3. Penny. 4. Rees'. 5. 
New American. 6. International. 7. John- 
son's Universal. 8. Chambers'. 9. People's 
Cy. of Universal Knowledge. 10. Schaff-Her- 
zog. Also the following Dictionaries: 11. 
Diet, of National Biography. A very large 
and exhaustive work published by MacMillan 
& Co., N. Y. Down to the name of Scobell 
completes fifty volumes. 12. Diet, of Chris- 



202 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

tian Biography, Smith and Wace. 13. Con- 
cise Diet, of Religions Knowledge, Christian 
Literature Co., N. Y., Edited by Jackson, 
Chambers and Foster. 

And when the weary task of examining 
all the foregoing was completed, we had our 
pains for our trouble. Somehow the name of 
this ' 'learned" writer had escaped them all. 
That there was at some time some such a man 
is probably true, but that he was possessed of 
ability that entitles him to be heard as an ' 'au- 
thority" is denied, and the absence of his 
name in the foregoing authorities is full proof 
that he is now considered to be such a back 
number as not to justify taking up space in 
even telling when and where he was born and 
and when and where he died. Oh, no, Adven- 
tists take the "Bible alone" and do not rely 
on history, but Andrews makes nearly fifty 
quotations from Morer, many of them long 
ones, and parades him as some great one. 
Morer in fact opposed the doctrine of the di- 
vine origin of first-day observance. He was 
an enemy of Sunday. To quote him is about 
the same as quoting one of their own number. 



Sect. 83. Andrews quotes Sir Wm. Dom- 
ville thirteen times and parades him as "an 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 203 

ab I e anti-Sabbatarian writer. ' ' Dom ville was an 
enemy of Sunday, denying the divine origin of 
first-day observance. Here again one of their 
own tract writers is entitled to as much con- 
sideration as the man they quote. The au- 
thor sought to learn something of this "able" 
genius from the Encyclopaedias. The follow- 
ing were consulted: 1. Britannica. 2. 
M'Clintock & Strong. 3. New American- 4. 
International. 5. Johnson's Universal. 6. 
People's Cy. of Universal Knowledge. 7. 
Chambers'. 8. Penny. 9. Rees'. Also the 
following Dictionaries. 10. Diet, of National 
Biography. 11. Diet, of Christian Bio- 
graphy. 12. Diet, of Religious Knowledge, 
and 13, the Schaif-Herzog Ency. And they all 
failed to even accord Domville the honor of 
mentioning his name in the usual manner of 
giving biographical data. No doubt they pass 
him by simply because he gave to the world 
nothing that could entitle him to a place 
among scholars and authors of repute. If 
Adventists would quote somebody besides 
some enemy of Sunday — and he too insignifi- 
cant to get his name into any Encyclopedia — 
we might tell our readers more about their 
historians. Let it be remembered that these 
men were the enemies of Sunday. Morer and 
Domville both wrote against Sunday. Their 



204 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

opinions are entitled to no more weight than 
those of such rabid anti- Sunday writers as 
Andrews himself. 



Sect. 84. Mr. Andrews makes a large 
number of quotations from Robert Cox. For- 
tunately the author found Mr. Cox mentioned 
in the Diet, of National Biography. 

Here is what is said of him: — 
"The attention of Cox was first directed to the Sab- 
bath question by the action of the Edinburgh and 
Glasgow Railway Company > in withdrawing a limited 
passenger service in connection with their Sunday 
trains. Having qualified as a share holder, he attend- 
ed two half-yearly meetings of the company in 1850, at 
each of which he moved that to the Sunday trains, 
which were being regularly run passenger carriages 
should be attached. The substances of his speeches 
he formed into a small pamphlet, addressed to the di- 
rectors, and entitled 'A Plea for, Sunday Trains,' As 
the result of subsequent reading and study, it was af- 
terward expanded into an octavo volume of 560 pages, 
published in 1853 under the title of 'Sabbath Laws and 
Sabbath Duties,' " etc. 

Adventists style this man "an able writ- 
er," and quotations from his book form a part 
of the ground work of Andrews' history. 
But who was Cox? Was he a learned unpreju- 
diced historian? No — he was a stockholder 
in a railroad company and wanted to run Sun- 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 205 

day passenger trains. At two meetings of 
the company he moved in support of Sunday 
passenger trains, supported his motion with 
with an address in each case, afterwards put 
the substance of his speeches into a small 
pamphlet, then expanded the pamphlet into a 
book — and lo and behold — this enemy of Sun- 
day, and Sunday-train hankering corporation 
stockholder, is transformed into a great his- 
torian! 

Dear reader, do you wish to become a 
great historian? Let me tell you how — buy a 
few shares of stock in a brickyard, railroad, 
or anything of that kind — and then in 01 der to 
make an extra dime write a book in favor of 
running Sunday trains, or making brick on 
Sunday, and the followers of Ellen White will 
forthwith crown you and set you upon a 
throne among the great ones of the earth! 
Yea, in many languages and in the distant 
parts of the earth you will become known as 
a great historian). ! In hurriedly glancing 
through Andrews' history we counted eighteen 
quotations from Cox. 



Sect. 85. In order to bring out the real 
character of certain other of the (?) f 'authori- 
ties v quoted by Sabbatarians it will be neces- 



206 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

sary to place before the reader certain facts 
of English History. We first quote from the 
Ency. Brit, concerning The Book of Sports — 

"SPORTS. The Book of, or more properly the De- 
claration of Sports, was issued by James I, in 1617 on 
the recommendation of Thomas Morton, bishop of Ches- 
ter, for use in Lancashire, where the king on his re 
turn from Scotland, found a conflict on the subject of 
Sunday amusements between the Puritans and the gen- 
try, many of whom were Roman Catholics. Permission 
was given for dancing, archery, leaping, vaulting, and 
other harmless recreations, and of 'having of May 
games, Whitsun ales, and morris dances, and the set- 
ting up of May-poles and other sports therewith used, 
* * * In 1618 James transmitted orders to the clergy 
of the whole of England to read the declaration from 
the pulpit; but so strong was the opposition that he 
prudently withdrew his command. In 1633 Charles I 
not only directed the republication of his father's de- 
claration, but insisted upon the reading of it by the 
clergy. Many of the clergy were punished for refus- 
ing to obey the injunction. With the fall of Laud, all 
attempt to enforce it necessarily came to an end," 

It will be seen that the Book of Sport 
was issued by King James in 1617. It was re- 
published by King Charlesin 1633. Concerning 
the republication by Charles the International 
Ency. has this to say: — 

"By republishing thisjdeclaration in 1633, and en- 
forcing with great severity, the reading of it by the 
clergy in their churches, Charles I and Laud excited 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 207 

among Puritans a degree of indignation which contri- 
buted not a little to the downfall of the monarchy and 
the church." 

In both the foregoing quotations we find 
a certain "Laud" spoken of. Who was he and 
what sort of a character did he bear? The 
Ency. Brit, says of him: — 

"Laud, Wm., Archbishop .of Canterbury in the 
reign of Charles I." 

"For his devotion he was appointed, in 1626. Bish- 
op of Bath and Wells, and dean of the Chapel Royal; in 
1627, a privy-councillor, and, in 1628, Bishop of Lon- 
don. After the assassination of Buckingham, Laud 
succeeded to his favor with the king. " 

"He inaugurated his rise to power by a relentless 
persecution of the Puritans. Leighton, a physician, 
was among the first victims. For the publication of 
Zions Plea, he had his nose slit; his ears cropt, and his 
forehead branded, besides being publicly whipped. In 
1630 he became Chancellor of Oxford." "Three years 
afterward he was present at the king 's coronation in Scot- 
land." "Returning home, he was presented in the 
same year to the see of Canterbury; and one of his first 
acts as primate was the republication of the Lawful 
Sunday Sports.' 11 

"That Laud was cruel and intolerant beyond his 
times, cannot be denied." 

The New American Cy. records Laud's in- 
famy in the following manner: — - 

"In 1624 he was madea member of the court of high 
commission, 1626 bishop of Bath and Wells, in 1627 a 
privy councillor, and in 1628 bishop of London. He 



208 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

became the confidential adviser of Charles I, in eccles- 
iastical affairs." 

"In 1628 Dr. Leigh ton, a Scotchman, published a 
book entitled 'Zion's Plea against the Prelacy.' At the 
instigation of Laud, he was brought before the star 
chamber in 1630, was condemned to pay a fine of £10,- 
000 was twice publicly whipped and pilloried in Cheap- 
side, had his ears cut off, his nostrils slit open, and his 
cheeks branded with the letters S. S. (sower of sedi- 
tion) and was imprisoned eleven years in the fleet." 

"He [Laud] became Chancellor of Oxford in 1630." 

"Was present in 1633 at the coronation of the king 
in Scotland." 

"On his return he was promoted to the see of Can- 
terbury, began his administration by the republication 
of the 'Lawful Sunday Sports.'" 

It seems hardly necessary to comment 
upon the character of King Charles and Arch- 
bishop Laud. Both were regular devils, fit 
only to be classed with savages, the enemies 
of any decent religious observance of Sunday, 
and either might easily have been the proto- 
type of Spanish barbarism. 

The next man that we have to reckon 
with is Peter Heylin. We give our read- 
ers a little history concerning him. 

The New American Ency. says: — 
"He was educated at Oxford, read lectures on his- 
tory and geography, was made D. D., and in 1629 was 
nominated, at the request of Laud, one of the chaplains 
n ordinary to the king." 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 209 

M'Clintock & Strong say of him: 
"His doctrines recommended him to the notice of 
Laud, then bishop of Bath and Wells." "He obtained 
various livings and clerical offices through the patron- 
age of Laud." 

The International Ency. says: — 

"Through the interest of Laud, in whose theory of 
church and king he devoutedly believed, Heylin was 
appointed chaplain in-ordinary to king Charles in 1629. 
* * Heylin was a very voluminous controversia- 
writer, but his works are of no value now, except as ill 
lustrative of the a#e in which he lived and the eccles- 
iastical party to which he belonged." 

The Schaff-Herzog Ency. says: — 
"His writings display violent prejudices and con- 
troversial rancor. The Presbyterians were the special 
objects of his spleen; * * The Aerius Redivivus, or 
History of the Presbyterians, * is a violent arraign- 
ment of the Presbyterians for being actuated with the 
spirit of the devil, and the promoters of sedition, mur- 
der, and other crimes." 

And the Dictionary of National Biogra- 
phy gives us the following choice bit of infor- 
mation: — 

"In 1636 Heylyn was ordered by the king to write 
a 'History of the Sabbath,' as an answer to the scruples 
raised by the Puritans. The book was written and 
printed in four months." 

Dr. Peter Heylin then was the tool and 
favorite of the tyrant King Charles I. and of 
the incarnate fiend Laud. We are told that 
"his doctrines recommended him to the notice 



210 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

of Laud." His doctrines must have been 
hell-derived to have pleased "butcher" Laud. 
The International Ency. says his "works are 
of no value noiv, v etc. SehafO-Herzog Ency. 
says "his writings display violent prejudices 
and controversial rancor." King Charles, the 
champion of Sunday "sports" ordered Heylin 
to write a "History of the Sabbath" to answer 
the scruples of the Puritans who believed in 
a decent observance of the first-day of the 
week. Heylin had this "made to order" his- 
tory written and printed in four months. If 
the queen of Spain should order Weyler to 
write a history of the Spanish- American war 
it would be about a parallel case and as much 
likelihood of truth in the one case as the 
other. Mr. Andrews in his Hist. Sabbath in* 
troduces Dr. Peter Heylin as "a distinguished 
member of the Church of England." In 
another place he speaks of his u candor and 
truth.' 5 No doubt Heylin was just the man 
from whom to look for "candor and truth" in 
Niagara torrents! ! Andrews makes from his 
writings more than twenty quotations, one 
containing forty-seven lines, another thirty- 
six lines, and so on. Heylin is one of the 
principal witnesses of Sabbatarians. He was 
the enemy of Sunday sacredness and the 
pliant tool of fiends. Certainly a cause must 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 211 

be hard pressed when driven to rely on such 
rot as the "made to order'' history of King 
Charles 1. 

Sect. 86. The next Adventist authority 
to claim our notice is Jeremy Taylor. Con- 
cerning him we will hear Johnson's Universal 

'"Gained the friendship of Bishop Laud, and in 1636 
obtained a fellowship at Oxford, and in 1638 was pre- 
sented to the rectory of Uppingham. In the civil wars 
he adhered to the cause of Charles I., who made him 
his chaplain, and in 1642 commanded that the degree of 
D. D. should be conferred upon him on account of a 
treatise which he had written in defense of episcopacy. 

For further information see the New 
American, Britannica, and International En- 
cyclopedias. However the foregoing quota- 
tion furnishes all the knowledge of him really 
necessary. From it, it will be seen that he 
was the friend and supporter of the same 
gang of cut-throats to which Heylin belonged. 
To know that much of him is sufficient. He 
is another of Andrews' witnesses. Three 
times he is quoted, and is spoken of as "a 
distinguished bishop of the Church of Eng- 
land." No doubt he was "distinguished." He 
traveled in a • 'distinguished" crowd. Not- 
withstanding the fact that he was so very "dis- 
tinguished" Andrews ungracefully contradicts 



212 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

him flatly. Seep. 338 of Hist. Sabbath. It is a 
general rule that an attorney is not permit- 
ted to impeach his own witness. However 
the established rules of evidence do not seem 
to hamper Adventists in the slighest degree. 

Sect. 87. The next Adventist authority 
to receive our attention will be Dr. Francis 
White. Andrews quotes him several times 
and calls him the "Lord Bishop of Ely." Let 
us see who this "Lord Bishop" is. Why is he 
so highly esteemed by Adventists? Simply 
because he was another of King Charles' and 
Archbishop Land's obedient tools. White's 
Treatise of the Sabbath-day was another of 
King Charles' "made to order" affairs. To 
prove this we have only to quote from An- 
drews' history. On page 489 Andrews quotes 
from White's Treatise as follows: — 

"It was the king, our gracious master, his will and 
pleasure, that a treatise should be set forth, to prevent 
further mischief, and to settle his good subjects (who 
have long time been distracted about Sabbatarian 
questions) in the old and good way of the ancient and 
orthodoxal Catholic church. Now that which his sa- 
cred Majesty commanded, I have by your Grace's di- 
rection [Archbishop Land! obediently performed." 

Yea verily! Who was this "sacred Maj- 
esty?" King Charles 1 of England, tyrant, 
traitor, and murderer, deposed from the 



FIRST DAY OBSERVANCE. 213 

throne, and beheaded by the people of Eng- 
land on Jan. 30, 1649. Among other things 
the Brit, says of him: — 

"He allowed the Star Chamber to sentence aclergy- 
man to perpetual imprisonment, mutilation, and whip- 
ping tor a libel against the bishops, and to reduces gen- 
tleman to poverty for merely sneering at the badge of a 
nobleman." "He supported Land's oppression of the 
Puritans, his inculcation of celibacy among the clergy, 
of auricular confession, of prayers for the dead, and of 
the doctrine of purgatory' 

The pure devilishness that shows itself 
at every turn in King Charles' conduct may 
be owing in part to the fact that he had, in 
his youth spent some time in Spain, and was, 
at one time, engaged to wed the Infanta. 

"Butcher" Laud has already been suffi- 
ciently noticed. And Heylin, Taylor, and 
White were the tools, associates and support- 
ers of Charles I. and Laud. The testimony of 
Justin Martyr is only worthy of being sneer- 
ed at— but the "made to order" history of tyr- 
ants and oppressors is worthy of all accepta- 
tion — according to Seventh day Adventism. 

We shall not pursue this examination of 
Adventist "authorities" further. To palm off 
the writings of such men as Cox, Heylin, Tay- 
lor, White, and a number of others of like 
kind upon the public as worthy of credence, is 
a fraud of which devils might well be ashamed. 



214 THIRTEEN CHAPTERS ON 

Andrews gathers together in his history the 
larger part of these quotations and they are 
now used by the whole brotherhood. Their 
lecturers qiiot® them with a great flourish 
and the masses of the people, not fcnbwing 1 
their real character, accept their statements 
and are deceived. To call this method of im- 
posing upon the public in the name of relig- 
ion, deception, is entirely too mild a term. 
Many of these authors quoted were Episco- 
palians. This fact is made to stand out prom- 
inently. Of course people at once conclude 
that they were Sunday men, and that their 
conclusions are therefore entitled to great 
weight. But what kind of Sunday men were 
they? King Charles was trying to force 
Sunday sports upon the realm— to make Sun- 
day a day for carousing generally. And Hey- 
lin, Taylor and White wrote in support of that 
move. Heylin and White wrote especially at 
the command of his "sacred Majesty, "and ex- 
pressly to prove that no sacredness attached 
to the first day of the week. They were all 
the enemies of any decent observance of the 
day. These are very fair samples of Sabba- 
tarian "authorities." 

The End. 



INDEX TO AUTHORS. 

(References are to Sections.) 



Addis & Arnold, 45, 77, 

Alford, 68, 

American Bible Union Translation, 54, 

Anatoli as, 15, 

Andrews, 16, 18, 19, 25, 35a, 55, 58, 61, 66, 76, 77, 79, 

82, 83, 84, 85, 87, 
Apostolical Constitutions, 16, 
Augustine, 12, 

B 

Bagster, 2, 

Bardesanes, 21, 

Barnabas, Epistie of, 24, 

Barnes, 48, 66, 67, 68, 69, 73, 

Beardsley, 73, 

Bible Commentary, 50, 

Blackstone, 4, 

Briney, 4, 

Britannica Eucy., 12, 13, 18, 19, 23, 21, 37, 85, 



INDEX TO AUTHORS. 217 



Canright, 2, 23, 53. 67, 
Christian, 4, 
Clark, 53, 59, 68, 69, 
Clemen of Alexandria, 20, 
Conybeare & Howson, 68, 
Cox, 84, 
Cramp, 69, 
Cremer, 2, 
Cyrpian, 17, 



Diet, of Christian Antiquities, 23, 46, 
Diet, of National Biography, 84, 85, 
Dionysius, 22, 
Doddridge, 59, 69, 
Domville, 83, 
Douay Bible, 77, 
Dullard, 77, 
Dungan, 68, 69, 

E 

Eclectic Commentary, 53, 
Emphatic Diaglott, 54, 58, 
Ency. of Religious Knowlege, 40, 
Eusebius, 13, 22, 

F 

Fisher ; 25, 31, 

G 

Greenfield, 2, 
Greenleaf, 4, 
Gregory-Ruter, 33, 



218 INDEX TO AUTHORS. 

H 

Hackett, 67, 
Hanna, 73, 
Harnack, 26, 
Henry, 52, 68, 69, 73, 
Heylin, 85, 
Hill, 28a, 80, 
Hodge, 4, 
Home, 4, 13, 18, 
Hummert, 77, 

I 

Interlinear New Testament, 54, 
International Ency.. 21, 23, 44b, 85. 

J 

Jamieson. Fausset & Brown, 52, 59, 73, 

Janes, 34, 

Johnson, 28a, 

Johnson's Universal Ency., 19, 28a, 38, 

Justin Martyr, 23, 

E 

Kitto'sCy.,23, 44a, 59a, 69, 

L 

Lamson, 32, 

Lange, 49, 

Lhamon, 67, 

Liddell & Scott, 2, 6, 58, QQ, 

Lightfoot, 26, 

Living Oracles, 54, 58, 

M 

Macknight, 55, 59, 

Mason, 69, 

M'CliDtock & Strong, 5, 13, 19, 23, 44, 85, 



INDEX TO AUTHORS. 219 

Meyer, 51, 55, 

Morer, 82, 

Morton, 58. 

Mosheim, 35, 

Murdock's Translation of Syriac N. T., 54, 59a, 70, 

N 

Neander, 35a, 

New American Ency., 43, 85, 

Noyes' N. T, Translation, 54, 



Olshausen, 6b, 
Origen, 18, 

P 
Penny Ency., 41, 
Peter of Alexandria, 14, 
Pliny, 25, 
Pulpit Commentary, 68, 

R 

Ramsay, 67, 

Rauschenbauch, 2, 67, 

Rees'sCy., 42, 

Robinson, 2, 

Rotherham's N. T. Translation, 58, 

s 

Schaff, 19, 23, 24. 26. 30, 

Schaff-HerzogEncy., 13, 14, 16, 19, 20, 22, 24, 35i, 39 , 

59a, 66, 69, 
Scott, 53, 69, 

Smith, Uriah, 28a, 77, 78, 
Smith's Bible Diet.. 4, 47, 
Sophocles, 2, 
Sozomen, 11, 
Strong, 58, 



220 INDEX TO AUTHORS. 

T 

Taylor, 86, 

Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, 26, 

Tertullian, 19, 

Thompson, 66, 

V 

Vogel, 75a, 

w 

Waggoner & Vogel Debate, 2, 69, 75a, 

Watson, 69, 

Wellcome, 2, 

Westcott & Hort, 2, 58, 66, 

WhedoQ, 73, 

White, 87, 

White. Mrs. E. G., 77, 

Winer, 6, 

Y 
Young's Bible Translation, 54, 



The False Prophetess 



Of 



Seventlvday Adventism 



The above is the title of a book now in preparation by the author of 
'Thirteen Chapters on First-day Observance." It will be published soon. 



Seventh-day Adventists have a prophetess in their camp. Her name is 
Mrs, Ellen G.White. Since 1844 she has had frequent revelations. Her 
inspired publications now number many volumes. She places herself on 
an equality with Apostles and Prophets. 

She says:— "In ancient times God spoke to men by the mouth of 
prophets and apostles, In these days he speaks to them by the Testimon- 
ies of his Spirit."— Test. No. 27, Vol.4, p. 148 of "Testimonies for the 
Church." 

Seventh-day Adventists place her "Testimonies" en an equality with 
the Bible. Thus the "Worker's Bulletin," (Seventh-day Adventist weekly 
pnblished at Des Moines, Iowa), says, in an article signed by Clarence San- 
tee, in its issue of July 19, 1898, (Vol, 10, No. 2):— "What could be a better 
subject than to study our relation to the afflicted, as revealed in the Bible 
and Testimonies?" 

Here the Testimonies [Mrs. White's Revelations] are placed alongside 
with the Bible itself. 



Seventh-day Adventists try to conceal these damaging facts. Buy this 
book and learn all about the matter. You will be astonished, startled 
amused, and put on your guard against one of the greatest frauds of the 
century. 

Address the AUTHOR, Kalona, Iowa. 




J^^^%T^^v 



fe^ 



m 



s> 



\1 "T -i^^sJ- 







w2^ 



V ?% 

V 






P^ 



Si VtCy\ 




^-&^¥^ 



&0< 




s>&»< 






v-^ 







J \k 














H 



limit 

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



■ 029 789 259 9 

m 



Wmssr 



MMmi 




WsMmMxm 



hBhPh 

JHHfll 
hRhBH 



HIIfflBRHnHi H 



■ 

ShBSB 

SBBSr 
ftps 

■ 



sm™ mis 



life B 

■■Rltll 






. 



m 



mm 



I WW! MS 








